- Cited — Dr Craig Wright v Peter McCormack 2023-07-26
“…t (2) the decision in Campbell was wrong in law and not binding because it relied on a misapplication of some obiter dicta of Lord Hailsham in Broome v Cassell [1972] AC 1027, was in conflict with Ul Haq, and could not stand with that case or with Summers.…”
- Cited — Youngsam, R (on the application of) v The Parole Board & Anor 2019-02-27
“…In Broome v Cassell & Co Ltd [1972] AC 1027, 1054, Lord Hailsham LC, found it necessary to remind the Court of Appeal that:…”
- Cited — Youngsam, R (on the application of) v The Parole Board & Anor 2019-02-27
“…adapt as circumstances change or new factual situations are presented. As Lord Reid put it in Broome v Cassell & Co Ltd [1972] AC 1027, 1085:…”
- Cited — Phonographic Performance Ltd v Ellis (t/a Bla Bla Bar) 2018-12-18
“…Broome v Cassell & Co Ltd [1972] AC 1027 was a case of libel damages; but Lord Hailsham LC did comment on the recovery of damages for copyright infringement. At 1081 he said:…”
- Cited — The British Council v Jeffery & Ors 2018-10-16
“…re entitled to treat the relevant part of her reasoning as per incuriam. Mr Kemp referred us to the decision of the House of Lords in Broome v Cassell & Co Ltd [1972] AC 1027, which he said established that it was not open to this Court to disregard a decision of the House or Lords – or, now, the Supreme Court – on that basis. The r…”
- Cited — Axa Insurance UK Plc v Financial Claims Solutions Ltd & Ors 2018-06-15
“…or does the word “calculated” mean that there has to have been a careful, mathematical computation. The judge cited what Lord Hailsham said in Broome v Cassell [1972] AC 1027 at 1079:…”
- Cited — WB v W District Council 2018-04-26
“…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:…”
- Cited — DN (Rwanda) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department 2018-02-22
“…m its own decisions testifies to the importance its attaches to the principle. The strictures of Lord Hailsham of St Marylebone LC in Broome v Cassell & Co Ltd [1972] AC 1027, 1053-1055, are too well known to call for repetition. They remain highly pertinent.…”