- Cited — Harmohinder Singh Gill (as Trustee of the Gillcrest UK Pension Scheme) v Lees News Limited 2023-10-12
“…it as binding. Moreover, in so far as there is a conflict between Youssefi and Hutchinson, we are free to choose between them: Young v Bristol Aeroplane Co Ltd [1944] KB 718, 725-6.…”
- Applied — Dr Craig Wright v Peter McCormack 2023-07-26
“…[1944] KB 718, none of which applied. The judge said he would also have been required to follow…”
- Distinguished — Invest Bank PSC v Ahmad Mohammad El-Husseini & Ors 2023-05-19
“…und by its own previous decisions, subject to well-known and limited exceptions (none of which are relevant in this case): see Young v Bristol Aeroplane Co Ltd [1944] KB 718, at 729-730 (Lord Greene MR). It is important, however, to understand when that doctrine will apply. At page 725, Lord Greene distinguished between four classe…”
- Cited — Ceredigion Recycling & Furniture Team v Pope 2022-01-14
“…[1944] KB 718…”
- Considered — Abidoye, R (on the application of) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department 2020-10-30
“…f a previous decision that was binding upon it, and which, if considered, would have compelled it to reach a different result: Young v Bristol Aeroplane Co Ltd [1944] KB 718. It is not good enough to show that particular arguments were not raised, or that the provisions that were overlooked were of marginal or contextual relevance:…”
- Followed — The Racing Partnership Ltd & Ors v Sports Information Services Ltd 2020-10-09
“… this is a somewhat arid dispute given that, if the two are in conflict, we are entitled and bound to choose between them: see Young v Bristol Aeroplane Co Ltd [1944] KB 718. Nevertheless, given my analysis of British Industrial Plastics v Ferguson, I do not consider that Belmont v Williams was decided per incuriam. It follows that…”
- Cited — The Racing Partnership Ltd & Ors v Sports Information Services Ltd 2020-10-09
“… per incuriam may not matter, because where there are conflicting decisions of this court, we are free to choose between them: Young v Bristol Aeroplane Co Ltd [1944] KB 718.…”
- Overruled — Curless v Shell International Ltd 2019-10-22
“…n earlier decision cannot stand with a subsequent decision of the House of Lords, even though it has not been expressly overruled: Young v Bristol Aeroplane Co [1944] KB 718, 725-6. Accordingly, Norris J went too far in BBGP, which was relied upon by…”
- Considered — Mazhar v The Lord Chancellor 2019-10-02
“…rtheless, it is established that a decision of a two member Court is binding on this Court, subject to the usual principles in Young v Bristol Aeroplane Co Ltd [1944] KB 718: see Langley v North West Water Authority [1991] 1 WLR 697 at p. 710 in the judgment of Lord Donaldson MR, with which Woolf and Mann LJJ agreed. After consider…”
- Cited — Henderson v Dorset Healthcare University NHS Foundation Trust 2018-08-03
“…[1944] KB 718…”
- Not followed — WB v W District Council 2018-04-26
“…tances a court can refuse to follow a previous decision of its own. The circumstances in which that is possible are set out in Young v Bristol Aeroplane Co Ltd [1944] KB 718. As Lord Hailsham put it in Broome v Cassell & Co Ltd [1972] AC 1027, 1054:…”
- Considered — WB v W District Council 2018-04-26
“…[1944] KB 718 offers guidance to each tier in matters affecting its own decisions. It does not entitle it to question considered decisions in the upper tiers with the same f…”
- Followed — Hickey v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 2018-04-20
“…hat this court was bound to follow the decision in MMcK because the Inner House was a court of ‘co-ordinate jurisdiction’: see Young v Bristol Aeroplane Co Ltd [1944] KB 718 (CA) at 729-730. He argued that this was because there is a single FTT and a single UT, each (for the purposes of welfare benefit appeals from the Upper Trubun…”