| We index case law. We gather in every new judgment we can find, and we provide a link to it. We then provide a headnote for cases which show some significance. When noting up cases we add the details of the cases cited, and provide cross references to them.
The content developed is presented in three ways:-
- We have a sophisticated search engine
- Cases can be seen with the cases cited, or with the cases citing that case
- Casemaps - An intuitive way of seeing cases in context, and of navigating through cases.
Using lawindexpro you can quickly find which cases may be relevant to you, and having identified them, where they can be found. If the case is available for free online, we usually have one or more direct links. At worst we will have the same links available through other sites.
- We have what we have. We do not have the rest - yet, and we can usually include cases requested by subscribers. We are gathering cases quickly. We list some information for over 88000 entries, and are adding some times 1000 cases a month. A quick comparison - the All ER have very approximately 35000 cases, Lawtel claims about 35000 cases, and the WLR list less than 27000 cases.
- What we don't have we can often find. If a case has continuing relevance, we are happy to do some work to try to find it a place within lawindexpro.
- Cases from before 1996 are included generally in order better to show how a more recent case fits into the history of law. We call these 'Roots cases' - they inform us about the meaning and source of current cases. We will never have full text for many cases before 1996.
Upgrading
Each case listing within the main database has a button in the top right hand corner. This brings the case to our attention as a request for us to upgrade the notes we have for that case. We have nearly always been able to provide some additional information, though this will take a few days.
Where a case has been noted up more recently, it may also include links to cases which it Cites and / or it is Cited by. This turns out to be a uniquely insightful way of reading case law. It seems to bring out a conceptual map of the law, and puts the case into an historical context.
|
| Donoghue (or McAlister) -v- Stevenson [1932] SC (HL) 31 - [1932] ScLT 317 - [1932] AC 562 - [1932] All ER Rep 1 - 147 LT 281 - 101 LJPC 119 | |
HL
26/05/1932
Lords Atkin, Thankerton MacMillan, Buckmaster Tomlin | Scotland - Negligence - Consumer |
|
| The appellant drank from a bottle of ginger beer manufactured by the defendant. She suffered injury when she found a half decomposed snail in the liquid. The glass was opaque and the snail could not be seen. The drink had been bought for her by a friend, so she was unable to rely upon any contract. Held: The English and the Scots law on the subject are identical. The pursuer was entitled to recover damages for negligence. The manufacturer intended that the contents be consumed without the opportunity first to examine them, and unless reasonable care was taken in the preparation a consumer may suffer injury. The cases of George v. Skivington and `the dicta in Heaven v. Pender "should be buried so securely that their perturbed spirits shall no longer vex the law." (Majority) The nature of an article “may very well call for different degrees of care”. “the person dealing with [an inherently dangerous article] may well contemplate persons as being within the sphere of his duty to take care who would not be sufficiently proximate with less dangerous goods; so that not only the degree of care but the range of persons to whom the duty is owed may be extended.” |
|
| Full text judgments: Hamlyn |
| | | |
|
|
HL
2004-11-11
Lord Scott of Foscote, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Baroness Hale of Richmond, Lord Carswell, Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood |
Legal Professions |
| The Bank anticipated criticism in an ad hoc enquiry called to investigate its handling of a matter involving also the claimant. The claimant sought disclosure of the documents created when solicitors advised employees of the Bank in preparing to present the Bank's case, and the Bank now appealed an order granting such access, arguing legal privilege. Held: The appeal succeeded, and the order for disclosure revoked. ". . . modern case law on legal professional privilege has divided the privilege into two categories, legal advice privilege and litigation privilege. Litigation privilege covers all documents brought into being for the purposes of litigation. Legal advice privilege covers communications between lawyers and their clients whereby legal advice is sought or given." and "If a solicitor becomes the client's "man of business", and some solicitors do, responsible for advising the client on all matters of business, including investment policy, finance policy and other business matters, the advice may lack a relevant legal context. There is, in my opinion, no way of avoiding difficulty in deciding in marginal cases whether the seeking of advice from or the giving of advice by lawyers does or does not take place in a relevant legal context so as to attract legal advice privilege. In cases of doubt the judge called upon to make the decision should ask whether the advice relates to the rights, liabilities, obligations or remedies of the client either under private law or under public law. If it does not, then, in my opinion, legal advice privilege would not apply. " Lord Carswell: Case law established that " . . . communications between parties or their solicitors and third parties for the purpose of obtaining information or advice in connection with existing or contemplated litigation are privileged, but only when the following conditions are satisfied: (a) litigation must be in progress or in contemplation; (b) the communications must have been made for the sole or dominant purpose of conducting that litigation; (c) the litigation must be adversarial, not investigative or inquisitorial." and " The work of advising a client on the most suitable approach to adopt, assembling material for presentation of his case and taking statements which set out the relevant material in an orderly fashion and omit the irrelevant is to my mind the classic exercise of one of the lawyer's skills. " |
|
| Links to judgments: - House of Lords - Bailii |
| | | |
|
|
HL
1992-11-26
Lord Bridge of Harwich, Lord Emslie, Lord Griffiths, Lord Oliver of Aylmerton and Lord Browne-Wilkinson Lord Mackay of Clashfern L.C., Lord Keith of Kinkel, Lord Griffiths, Lord Ackner |
Constitutional Income Tax |
| The inspector sought to tax the benefits in kind received by teachers at a private school, in having their children educated at the school for free. Having agreed this was a taxable emolument, it was argued as to whether the taxable benefit was the cost to the employer, or the cost of a school place. Debates in Parliament had discussed this issue, and the parties sought to refer to the debate. Held: It was not an impeachment of Parliament or an infringement of the Bill of Rights to examine Hansard to resolve issues provided the legislation was ambiguous, obscure or suffered an absurdity, and the material referred to comprised statements by a minister or other promoter of the Bill or supporting material, and the statements referred to were themselves clear. Having so referred to Hansard in this case, the taxable cost was the additional marginal cost of providing the service, the profit the school would normally have made. |
Bill of Rights 1688 9
Finance Act 1976 23 61 63 |
| Links to judgments: - lip |
| Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd -v- Heller & Partners Ltd [1963] 2 All ER 575 - [1964] AC 465 | |
HL
1963
Lord Morris, Lord Devlin, Lord Reid, Lord Hodson | Professional Negligence |
|
| Irrespective of any contract, if someone who is possessed of a special skill undertakes to apply that skill for the assistance of another person, who relies upon such skill, then a duty of care will arise. In certain circumstances a professional adviser might be liable even in the absence of a contractual or fiduciary relationship between himself and the person who had suffered some economic loss. Lord Devlin considered the sort of relationship which gave rise to a responsibility towards those who act upon information or advice and so created a duty of care towards the person so acting, saying "I do not understand any of your Lordships to hold that it is a responsibility imposed by law upon certain types of persons or in certain sorts of situations. It is a responsibility that is voluntarily accepted or undertaken, either generally where a general relationship, such as that of solicitor and client or banker and customer, is created, or specifically in relation to a particular transaction." and (Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest) " …it should now be regarded as settled that if someone possessed of a special skill undertakes, quite irrespective of contract, to apply that skill for the assistance of another person who relies upon such skill, a duty of care will arise. The fact that the service is to be given by means of or by the instrumentality of words can make no difference. Furthermore, if in a sphere in which a person is so placed that they could reasonably rely upon his judgment or his skill or upon his ability to make careful inquiry, a person takes it upon himself to give information or advice to, or allows his information or advice to be passed on to, another person who, as he knows or should know, will place reliance upon it, then a duty of care will arise." |
|
|
|