How many times has [1971] 1 WLR 1094 been cited?

[1971] 1 WLR 1094 is cited by 2 judgment(s) in this dataset.

[1971] 1 WLR 1094

· cited by 2 · influence score 14/100

Is it still good law? No negative treatment found in this dataset — it has been cited without being doubted or overruled here.

How to cite

[1971] 1 WLR 1094

Neutral citation format (OSCOLA). Always confirm against the official judgment.

Applied · 1Followed · 1

Applied — Daniel Richard Jwanczuk v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 2023-10-11
“… Deane) which apply the same rule – see, for example, Re Hartland [1911] 1 Ch 459; Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity v Clarke Chapman & Co Ltd [1971] 1 WLR 1094 (per Widgery LJ at p. 1102); and R (DK) v Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs [2022] EWCA Civ 120, [2022] 3 All ER 1025 (per Singh LJ at para. 46). I have focuse…”
Followed — DK (R on the application of) v The Commissioners for HMRC 2022-02-08
“…a “compelling reason” not to follow a Scottish decision on the same point: see e.g. Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity v Clarke Chapman & Co Ltd[1971] 1 WLR 1094, at 1102 (Widgery LJ); and Deane v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions[2010] EWCA Civ 699; [2011] 1 WLR 743, at para. 26 (Ward LJ), citing Abbott v Philbi…”