Re Dr Bonham’s Case (1608) 8 Coke Reports 107a, 77 ER 638, Court of King’s Bench; Dr Bonham’s Case (1609) 8 Coke Reports 113b, 77 ER 646, Court of King’s Bench

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Webb
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Glorious Revolution ◽  
The Glorious Revolution

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Re Dr Bonham’s Case (1608) 8 Coke Reports 107a, 77 ER 638, Court of King’s Bench; Dr Bonham’s Case (1609) 8 Coke Reports 113b, 77 ER 646, Court of King’s Bench. This case concerns questions of bias and, more importantly, the attempt by Sir Edward Coke CJ to establish a common law power to overturn Acts of Parliament. The case predates the constitutional settlement which followed the Glorious Revolution of 1688, but echoes of the principles discussed in this case can also be found in modern case law. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.

Re Dr Bonham’s Case (1608) 8 Coke Reports 107a, 77 ER 638, Court of King’s Bench; Dr Bonham’s Case (1609) 8 Coke Reports 113b, 77 ER 646, Court of King’s Bench

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Webb
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Glorious Revolution ◽  
The Glorious Revolution

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in Re Dr Bonham’s Case (1608) 8 Coke Reports 107a, 77 ER 638, Court of King’s Bench; Dr Bonham’s Case (1609) 8 Coke Reports 113b, 77 ER 646, Court of King’s Bench. This case concerns questions of bias and, more importantly, the attempt by Coke to establish a common law power to overturn Acts of Parliament. The case predates the constitutional settlement which followed the Glorious Revolution of 1688, but echoes of the principles discussed in this case can also be found in modern case law. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.

The Common Law, Reasons and Administrative Justice

1994 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 282-302 ◽  
Author(s):  
P.P. Craig
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
General Duty ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
The Common ◽  
Home Department

The capacity of the common law to develop and evolve is well recognised within both private and public law. This is indeed one of its enduring qualities. The objective of the present article is not, however, to contribute to the jurisprudential debate concerning the nature of the adjudicative process at common law. My object is more modest. It is to consider and place in perspective some of the recent developments which have occurred at common law in relation to the duty of public authorities to provide reasons. It is a well known and oft repeated proposition that there is no general common law duty to furnish the reasons for a decision. It is equally well known that this proposition has been the target of regular attack by those who argue that such a general duty should exist. A reconsideration of both of these propositions is timely in the light of case law developments culminating in the House of Lords' judgment in R. v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex p. Doody.

Developing the Jurisprudence of Constitutional Remedies for Breach of Fundamental Rights in South Africa: An Analysis of Hoffman and Related Cases

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (1&2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chuks Okpaluba
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
South African ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
The Novel ◽  
Labour Law

In order to accomplish its objectives of extensively regulating rights and obligations, the 1996 Constitution of South Africa similarly provides for the enforcement of those rights by the courts. In turn, it has, in the said enforcement provisions, invested in the courts enormous discretionary powers to enable them to effectively deal with breaches of the entrenched fundamental rights as well as all constitutional rights violations. That the Constitutional Court has purposefully interpreted and made optimum use of the expressions: ‘appropriate relief’ and ‘just and equitable’ order in developing the constitutional remedies jurisprudence is crystal clear from a wealth of available case law. It is also not in doubt that the contributions of Justice Ngcobo (later Chief Justice) in this regard are intellectually gratifying. This presentation singles out for discussion and analysis the judgment of Ngcobo J in Hoffman v South African Airways 2001 (1) SA 1 (CC) which not only typifies judicial activism at its acme; it has also introduced into the South African public and labour laws, the novel remedy of ‘instatement.’ Apparently drawn from the analogy of the labour law remedy of reinstatement, ‘instatement’ is akin to the remedy of mandamus in public law, and specific performance in the law of contract. This article moves from the premise that this innovation is one of its kind in contemporary common law jurisprudence and one which courts in the common law jurisdictions world would no doubt emulate one fine day.

The Common Law Legal Tradition: First Things First

2021 ◽  
pp. 15-22
Author(s):  
Steven Gow Calabresi
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Review ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Primary Source ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Legal Tradition ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Law

This chapter explains briefly the origins and development of the common law tradition in order to better understand the rise of judicial review in the seven common law countries discussed in this volume. The common law legal tradition is characterized historically, in public law, by limited, constitutional government and by forms of judicial review of the constitutionality of legislation. In private law, the common law tradition is characterized by judge-made case law, which is the primary source of the law, instead of a massive code being the primary source of the law. The common law tradition is also characterized by reliance on the institution of trial by jury. Judges, rather than scholars, are the key figures who are revered in the common law legal tradition, and this is one of the key things that distinguishes the common law legal tradition from the civil law legal tradition. The common law legal tradition emphasizes judicial power, which explains why it has led to judicial review in the countries studied in this volume. It is the prevailing legal tradition in the four countries with the oldest systems of judicial review of the constitutionality of legislation: the United States, Canada, Australia, and India. Thus, judicial review of the constitutionality of legislation in these four countries is very much shaped by common law attitudes about the roles of judges.

16. Breach of Statutory Duty

Tort Law ◽  
2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jenny Steele
Keyword(s):  
Social Welfare ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Liberties ◽  
Civil Liability ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Industrial Safety ◽  
Workplace Injuries ◽  
Statutory Duty ◽  
Academic Debate

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing able students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter deals with the action for breach of statutory duty, an action in tort meant to remedy harm caused by a breach of the duty. It first considers the distinctiveness of the tort of breach of statutory duty, with particular reference to the question of whether the breach gives rise to liability at common law. It then looks at case law involving civil liability for breach of industrial safety, citing Groves v Wimborne (Lord) [1898] 2 QB 402 and its significance in the context of workplace injuries. It also discusses cases dealing with ‘social welfare’ legislation and ‘public law duties’ as well as civil liberties before concluding with an assessment of the effect of the restrictive approach to the action for breach of statutory duty on the tort of negligence.

War, Resistance, Revolution

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Barducci
Keyword(s):  
Just War ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Glorious Revolution ◽  
Law Of War ◽  
Natural Right ◽  
Ancient Constitution ◽  
Resistance Theory ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Glorious Revolution

This chapter examines the uses of Grotius’ resistance theory primarily based on the analysis of the natural right of punishment and the law of war devised in De Iure. After an outline of Grotius’ view of resistance, the chapter moves on to examine its multifaceted reception in England until after Locke’s re-elaboration in the Two Treatises of Government, during which time it provided an intellectual and legal groundwork for negotiation between Whigs and Tories around the exclusion of James II and the ascension of William and Mary. In this regard, Grotius not only brought to England a theory of conquest that filled a gap in the shared tradition of common law and ancient constitution, but his attempt to reconceptualize resistance theory in terms of just war fit particularly well in the justification both of the Republic in 1649 and of the Glorious Revolution.

scholarly journals PARTING COMPANIES: THE GLORIOUS REVOLUTION, COMPANY POWER, AND IMPERIAL MERCANTILISM

2014 ◽  
Vol 57 (3) ◽  
pp. 617-638 ◽  
Author(s):  
WILLIAM A. PETTIGREW ◽  
GEORGE W. VAN CLEVE
Keyword(s):  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
Critical Period ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Glorious Revolution ◽  
Full Account ◽  
New Material ◽  
The Glorious Revolution

ABSTRACTThis article revisits the late seventeenth-century histories of two of England's most successful overseas trading monopolies, the East India and Royal African Companies. It offers the first full account of the various enforcement powers and strategies that both companies developed and stresses their unity of purpose in the seventeenth century. It assesses the complex effects that the ‘Glorious Revolution’ had on these powers and strategies, unearthing much new material about the case law for monopoly enforcement in this critical period and revising existing accounts that continue to assert the Revolution's exclusively deregulating effects and that miss crucial subtleties in the case law and related alterations in company behaviour. It asks why the two companies parted company as legal and political entities and offers an explanation that connects the fortunes of both monopoly companies to their public profile and differing constituencies in the English empire and the varying non-European political contexts in which they operated.

Public Law Cases and the Common Law

2020 ◽  
pp. 83-106
Author(s):  
Alison L Young
Keyword(s):  
First Principles ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Relative Importance ◽  
Substantive Equality ◽  
Abstract Level ◽  
The Common

This chapter argues that, despite the weaknesses of common law reasoning, case law still plays an important role in UK public law. It also explains how weaknesses in common law reasoning are resolved either through developing taxonomies which apply in a rule-like manner, or through moving towards reasoning from first principles. An argument could be made that, at an abstract level, public law is more suited to reasoning from first principles rather than adopting a taxonomical approach. However, this is a weak argument. A stronger argument recognises that specific aspects of public law lend themselves to either a taxonomical or a principled approach, depending on the relative importance of certainty and accuracy; formal and substantive equality and the relative importance of the rule-maker and the rule-applier.

John Company Armed: The English East India Company, the Anglo-Mughal War and Absolutist Imperialism, c. 1675–1690

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 101-137 ◽  
Author(s):  
James M. Vaughn
Keyword(s):  
Seventeenth Century ◽  
South Asian ◽  
East India Company ◽  
Economic Conditions ◽  
Glorious Revolution ◽  
Mughal Empire ◽  
Imperial Expansion ◽  
English East India Company ◽  
Formed Part ◽  
The Glorious Revolution

During the 1670s and 1680s, the English East India Company pursued an aggressive programme of imperial expansion in the Asian maritime world, culminating in a series of armed assaults on the Mughal Empire. With important exceptions, most scholarship has viewed the Company's coercive imperialism in the later seventeenth century and the First Anglo-Mughal War as the results primarily, if not exclusively, of political and economic conditions in South Asia. This article re-examines and re-interprets this burst of imperial expansion in light of political developments in England and the wider English empire during the later Stuart era. The article contends that the Company's aggressive overseas expansion was pursued for metropolitan and pan-imperial purposes as much as for South Asian ones. The corporation sought to centralise and militarise the English presence in Asia in order both to maintain its control of England's trade to the East and in support of Stuart absolutism. By the eve of the Glorious Revolution, the Company's aggressive imperialism formed part of a wider political project to create an absolute monarchy in England and to establish an autocratic English empire overseas.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document