Statutory Interpretation CASES

Lady justice next to law books

Milchkontor v Haupzollamt Saarbrucken (Interpretation of the Court of Justice Binding) [1969] EUECJ C-29/68

A German company challenged turnover equalization tax rates on imports. The Court clarified that its preliminary rulings bind national courts, but those courts may make further references if needed. The case interpreted Article 97 EEC Treaty regarding average tax rates for imported products. Facts Milch-, Fett- und Eierkontor GmbH, a...

Law books in a law library

Heydon’s Case [1584] EWHC Exch J36

A dispute over the validity of a lease made by a dissolved college. The Exchequer Court established the famous 'mischief rule' for statutory interpretation, requiring courts to consider the common law, the mischief Parliament sought to remedy, and the remedy provided, to suppress the mischief and advance the remedy. Facts...

Law books on a desk

Fothergill v Monarch Airlines Ltd [1980] UKHL 6

Mr Fothergill's suitcase was damaged during an international flight and some contents were missing. He reported the damage but not the loss of contents within seven days. The House of Lords held that 'damage' in Article 26(2) of the Warsaw Convention includes partial loss of contents, requiring timely complaint. Facts...

Law books on a desk

Farrell v Alexander [1976] UKHL 5

Mrs Farrell paid £4,000 for fixtures and fittings to obtain a flat tenancy, but the amount exceeded their true value. The existing tenant surrendered her lease so the landlord could grant a new tenancy to Mrs Farrell. The House of Lords held that section 85 of the Rent Act 1968...

Law books in a law library

Brutus v Cozens [1972] UKHL 6

The appellant disrupted a Wimbledon tennis match to protest South African apartheid. Magistrates found his behaviour was not 'insulting' under section 5 of the Public Order Act 1936. The House of Lords upheld this, ruling that 'insulting' carries its ordinary meaning and whether behaviour is insulting is a question of...

Lady justice with law books

R v Lane and Letts [2018] UKSC 36

Two parents were charged with terrorism funding for sending money overseas. Before trial, the Supreme Court had to interpret "has reasonable cause to suspect" in section 17 Terrorism Act 2000, holding it sets an objective suspicion test, not requiring actual suspicion. Facts The appeal arose from a preparatory hearing in...

Law books in a law library

Sweet v Parsley [1970] AC 132

Miss Sweet, a teacher who let out her farmhouse to students, was convicted under section 5(b) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1965 after tenants smoked cannabis without her knowledge. The House of Lords held that mens rea was required, quashed her conviction, and reaffirmed the strong presumption against strict liability...

Lady justice next to law books

Chandler v DPP [1964] AC 763

Members of the Committee of 100 planned to occupy and immobilise RAF Wethersfield, a prohibited place, to protest nuclear weapons. Convicted under the Official Secrets Act 1911, they argued their aim benefited the State. The House of Lords held that obstructing defence facilities was a prejudicial purpose and upheld the...

Lady justice next to law books

R v Hughes [2013] UKSC 56

Mr Hughes, uninsured and without a full licence but driving faultlessly, was involved in a fatal collision entirely caused by another driver’s dangerous, drug‑impaired driving. The Supreme Court held that section 3ZB requires some culpable element in the defendant’s driving which contributes to the death. Facts On a Sunday afternoon...

Law books in a law library

Mirvahedy v Henley [2003] UKHL 16

Mr Mirvahedy was seriously injured when his car collided with a horse that had escaped from the Henleys' field after being frightened and stampeding through fences. Despite no negligence by the horse owners, the House of Lords held they were strictly liable under section 2(2) of the Animals Act 1971...

Lady justice with law books

Department for Business and Trade v The Information Commissioner [2025] UKSC 27 (23 July 2025)

The Information Commissioner appealed against the cumulative approach to assessing qualified exemptions under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. The Supreme Court held that where multiple qualified exemptions apply to requested information, public interest factors against disclosure may be aggregated rather than assessed independently for each exemption. Facts In November...