No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Mr. Justice Browne's Judgment in the Anisminic Case
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 16 January 2009
Extract
ALL those—and they will be many—concerned with the case of Anisminic Ltd. v. Foreign Compensation Commission [1968] 2 Q.B. 862 (C.A.), [1969] 2 W.L.R. 163 (H.L.) will have noticed the references made in the Court of Appeal and in the House of Lords to the judgment delivered by Browne J. at first instance. This judgment is of particular interest and importance, not only because it was upheld by the House of Lords after being reversed by the Court of Appeal, but also because it made an extensive review and analysis of the authorities, which the higher courts to some extent adopted and incorporated by reference. Unfortunately this valuable judgment has not been reported, presumably because it ran to some 40,000 words in length.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge Law Journal and Contributors 1969
References
1 [1953] 2 Q.B. 18.
2 [1965] 1 Q.B. 57.
3 [1897] A.C. 615.
4 [1964] 1 W.L.R. 226.
5 [1897] A.C. 615.
6 [1964] 1 W.L.R. 226.
7 R. v. Assessment Committee of the Metropolitan Borough of Shoreditch [1910] 2 K.B. 859Google Scholar, per Farwell L.J. at p. 880; I am much indebted for this authority and for other help to an article by Professor Wade, H. W. R. on “Anglo-American Administrative Law” in (1966) 82 L.Q.R. 226Google Scholar
8 See the Northumberland Case [1952] 1 K.B. 338Google Scholar, per Denning L.J. at pp. 346–347; see also per Morris L.J. at p. 357
9 R. v. Nat Bell Liquors Ltd. [1962] 2 A.C. 128 at p. 156Google Scholar; I shall refer to this case hereafter as “the Nat Bell case.”
10 See, for example, R. v. Medical Appeal Tribunal, ex p. Gilmore [1957] 1 Q.B. 574Google Scholar, per Parker L.J. at p. 588.
11 Supra, p. 233; Punton's Case [1964] 1 W.L.R. 226.Google Scholar
12 The Northumberland Case [1951] 1 K.B. 711Google Scholar, per Lord Goddard C.J. at p. 716.
13 [1960] 2 Q.B. 133.
14 At pp. 142–143.
15 (1878) 3 Q.B.D. 509.
16 The Northumberland Case [1951]Google Scholar 1 K.B., per Lord Goddard C.J. at p. 179 and Ex p. Bradlaugh (1878) 3 Q.B.D. 509.
17 (1878) 3 Q.B.D. 509.
18 [1937] A.C. 898.
19 At p. 917.
20 [1953] A.C. 151.
21 [1953] 2 Q.B. 147.
22 [1967] 1 A.C. 13.
22a [1952] 1 K.B. at p. 353.
23 (1841) 1 Q.B. 66.
24 [1910] 2 I.R. 695.
25 (1819) 2 Br. & B. 432.
26 (1841) 1 Q.B. 66.
27 See p. 68.
28 At pp. 71–75.
29 See p. 76.
30 See p. 71.
31 At p. 74.
32 [1910] 2 I.R. 695.
33 See Palles C.B. at pp. 719–720 and Gibson J. at p. 728.
34 [1899] A.C. 143.
35 At pp. 749–750.
36 As to this, see also pp. 738 and 743.
37 See p. 750.
38 See p. 718.
39 [1922] 2 A.C. 128.
40 [1951] 1 K.B. at p. 720.
41 At p. 143.
42 See pp. 144–145.
43 See Nat Bell at p. 160.
44 [1951] 1 K.B. 711; [1952] 1 K.B. 338.
45 [1956] A.C. 736.
46 [1956] A.C. 736.
47 [1960] 2 Q.B. 133.
48 (1861) 4 L.T. 31 at p. 32.
49 [1959] A.C. 83.
50 [1910] 2 K.B. 859.
51 (1878) 3 Q.B.D. 509.
52 [1953] 2 Q.B. 147.
53 [1966] 2 W.L.R. 921.
54 This refers to R. v. Foreign Compensation Commission, ex p. Oak and Timber Co. Ltd. (1956) (unreported) in which the Divisional Court refused an application for certiorari to quash a decision of the Commission. Browne J.'s discussion of this case follows after his discussion of the East Elloe case. The learned judge was satisfied that no question of the Commission's jurisdiction was raised in that case and that the error complained of, if it was an error, was an error within jurisdiction.