Stare Decisis Radio

In the early 1930s, James Joyce's novel Ulysses was seized by customs on importation to the United States of America. A federal court had to decide whether the novel was "obscene" or not. In this podcast, we consider the decision of the trial court and the appeal court on this issue.

A seven year old girl is brought by her mother to Pakistan. The mother’s former same sex partner, who had an active involvement with her upbringing, and considered herself the girl’s parent, applies to the court to order her return. The High Court refuses jurisdiction on the grounds that the girl was no longer “habitually resident” in the UK. The Supreme Court considers when habitual residence begins and ends.

A man borrows a truck without the consent of the owner, and is then involved in a collision with another driver, who is killed. He is charged with the offence of “aggravated vehicle taking”, which arises where a person using a car unlawfully causes damage or injury. There is no evidence that the manner of his driving cause the fatal accident, so can he be convicted of the offence? Lord Sumption delivers the unanimous judgment.

An alleged supporter of Al Qaida has had his assets frozen by a UN committee, with the support of the UK’s Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. The Foreign Secretary’s support is challenged on a number of grounds, including the use of information obtained by torture, wrongful interference with property rights, and the application of the incorrect standard of proof. Can the decision stand?

A convicted murderer is placed in a high-security psychiatric hospital for several years. After the expiration of his tariff, he is transferred to a private hospital and his treatment involves his gradual reintroduction to the community. The Secretary of Justice refuses consent to some of this treatment, and he seeks judicial review. As part of the proceedings, he seeks to protect his anonymity. Do the public have a right to know his identity?

A Polish national and an Austrian national are living in the UK. They apply for income support and housing assistance respectively. But their applications are refused on the grounds that they do not have a right of residence in the UK, despite being EU citizens. Is this a breach of EU law? Lord Neuberger delivers the unanimous judgment.

At a time of serious gang-related violence, police are authorised to carry out "suspicionless" stop and search for weapons. A police officer searches the bag of a 37-year-old woman who fails to pay her bus fare. Was this an unjustified interference with her right to privacy?

A man accused of murder tries to adduce sensitive information in his defence. An order is made that the defence case be heard in camera and barring the evidence from publication. He brings an application to the European Court of Human Rights, but is unable to disclose the information to the court. Should the order be modified to allow him to disclose it?

A defendant to a civil action fails to comply with an order for disclosure, and an order is made by the High Court barring him from defending the claim. A different High Court judge then sets aside the order. Was he wrong to do so?

An accused is convicted in Scotland of possession of a handgun and assault of two police officers, based largely on identification evidence. Subsequently, it transpires that certain evidence was not disclosed that could potentially raise a doubt as to the identification. Should the conviction be set aside?

The operator of the Channel Tunnel takes over a defunct cross-channel ferry service. The Competition and Markets Authority intervenes, claiming that this is a merger. Did the authority have the necessary jurisdiction?

The Scottish Ministers grant consent for the operation of a wind farm. But it will be visible from a golf club, owned a Donald Trump company, and it challenges the consent. Were the operators entitled to the benefit of the decision, without a licence to generate electricity? And were the conditions attached to the consent so uncertain as to be unenforceable?

A machine hire company is found to have been hiring out stolen property. The owner is convicted of handling stolen goods, with a consequential confiscation order imposed, based on his turnover. But he has paid VAT on his invoices. Should this be included in the assessment of turnover? The Supreme Court decides.

A tenant pays rent in advance for a full quarter, then the lease is terminated under a break clause before the quarter has expired. Should the landlord return the rent for the period after the termination? Lord Neuberger gives the decision of the Supreme Court.

Directors of a company attempt to restrict the right of certain minority shareholders to vote at the AGM, fearing a "corporate raid" on the company's shares. Were the restrictions for a "proper purpose"? The Supreme Court decides, with Lord Sumption delivering the lead judgment.

A young child is brought by his mother from Morocco to the UK. His father seeks his return to Morocco. Do the UK courts have the jurisdiction to order his return?

Twenty three men were killed by British soldiers during an insurgency in Malaya in 1948. Were they shot trying to flee, or were they massacred in cold blood? Can the UK government now be required by law to hold a public inquiry into the killings?

Two women with UK citizenship are married to foreign men who cannot speak English. Under a rule imposed in 2010, their husbands cannot move to the UK unless they pass an English language test. Is this rule in breach of their right to a family life?

A young woman is given a house by her parents. She discovers two years later that mortgage documentation has been signed over the house in her name, and that the money used for the purchase has - in effect - been borrowed from a bank. Is she entitled to the full ownership of the house, or does the bank have any rights over it?

Two people had broken terms of a contract. One had broken a "restraint of trade" clause in the multi-million pound agreement for the sale of a company. The other had stayed nearly three hours in a car park where he was only allowed to park for two hours. Each contract contained harsh provisions for the person in default. Were they being unreasonably punished?