Revill v Newbery [1996] QB 567

Facts:

  • C, a burglar, was shot by D as he attempted to gain access to D’s shed.
  • C sued D in negligence and under the 1984 Act.

Ratio:

  • CoA rejected D’s attempt to raise the defence of illegality.
  • C was contributorily negligent and his damages decreased by ⅔.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Sion v Hampstead Health Authority [1994] EWCA Civ 26

Summarise and discuss Lord Bingham’s eight ‘sub-rules’ of the Rule of Law.

R. (on the application of Abbasi) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2002] EWCA Civ 1598, (2002)