How many times has [1992] 1 AC 58 been cited?

[1992] 1 AC 58 is cited by 2 judgment(s) in this dataset.

[1992] 1 AC 58

· cited by 2 · influence score 13/100

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

[1992] 1 AC 58

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

Cited · 2

Cited — SPM (R on the application of) v Secretary Of State For The Home Department 2023-07-04
“…en shifts to the defendant to show that there was lawful justification for doing so. As Lord Bridge said in R v Deputy Governor of Parkhurst Prison, Ex p Hague [1992] 1 AC 58, 162C-D: “The tort of false imprisonment has two ingredients: the fact of imprisonment and the absence of lawful authority to justify it.”…”
Cited — Hemmati & Ors, R (on the application of) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department 2018-10-04
“… the defendant to show that there was lawful justification for doing so. As Lord Bridge of Harwich said in R v Deputy Governor of Parkhurst Prison, ex p. Hague [1992] 1 AC 58, 162C-D: “The tort of false imprisonment has two ingredients: the fact of imprisonment and the absence of lawful authority to justify it.””…”