0370 270 6000

Stenning v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Court of Appeal, 31 May 2002

7 June 2002
The issues

Judiciary – appropriate level to hear cases.

The facts

This case is mentioned merely because of the Court of Appeal’s comments with regard to the Judgment of the Recorder below which they overturned. The claim concerned liability of the Home Office for the assault on one prisoner by another in Wakefield Jail. The Court noted that this was “no ordinary County Court action” and that “it should not have been assigned to a Deputy Judge unless the designated Civil Judge was satisfied that the Judge had sufficient experience to try a case of this degree of complexity and sensitivity. In the event, it was difficult to discern from the Judgment whether and when the Judge made findings of negligence and what standard of care he was applying for the purpose.

Focus on...

Legal updates

Court of Appeal confirms exclusive English jurisdiction clause in excess liability policies in Canadian pipeline dispute

On 10 June 2022 the Court of Appeal upheld an anti-suit injunction granted in favour of insurers by Mr Justice Jacobs in September 2021 restraining proceedings from being brought in Canada and enforcing the exclusive English jurisdiction clause in excess liability policies.



Payment Fraud landscape shaped by technology in 2021

Payment systems across Europe are under increased pressure to mitigate fraud risks and defend against persistent attacks from enablers using ever more sophisticated and malicious viruses and malware.


Legal updates

Gosden and another v Halliwell Landau and another [2021] EWHC 159 (Comm)

This claim addressed the question, of when the date for assessment of damages in cases of negligence should be determined and shows that when appropriate the Courts will depart from the default position.


Legal updates

Assessing the scope of employers liability – Chell v Tarmac

These were the opening remarks of Mr Justice Martin Spencer when handing down his Judgment in the recent case of Andrew Chell v Tarmac Cement and Lime Limited [2020] EWHC 2613, the latest in a series of appeals dealing with the scope of vicarious liability.


The content on this page is provided for the purposes of general interest and information. It contains only brief summaries of aspects of the subject matter and does not provide comprehensive statements of the law. It does not constitute legal advice and does not provide a substitute for it.

Mailing list sign up

Select which mailings you would like to receive from us.

Sign up