Liversidge v Sir John Anderson: HL 3 Nov Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department Ex Parte Abdi, Same v Same. In Rex v. Leman Street Police Station Inspector (1) it was held that art. an order made by Sir John Anderson as Home Secretary on May 26, , under reg. There was a 4/5 ruling AGAINST Liversidge in , it was ruled that no court can investigate whether the Secretary of State had reasonable.
|Published (Last):||1 February 2006|
|PDF File Size:||11.58 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||16.90 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
This was not a view favoured by the Attorney-General in the present case, for it weakens his case as to public mischief. The majority of the Law Lords held that the anddrson should be interpreted so as to make effect what Parliament intended, even if that meant adding to the words to give that effect. A judge of first instance might hold the Secretary of State to have been justified in his belief, the Court of Appeal might take another view and this House might have its own view.
Officer Administering the Government of Nigeria 2. Under the more exacting rules of pleading to which I was accustomed in the courts of Scotland the relevancy and sufficiency of the averments which I have above set out would certainly not have escaped criticism.
The respondents sought to find support in the decision in Rex v. This seems to me, with respect, to be fantastic. Slade for the appellant. In my opinion, the appellant is not bound to rely on the traverse, though livfrsidge a matter of pleading that, in my opinion, amounts to a positive allegation of authority to detain for which particulars may be asked.
Morrison, an injunction against the continued detention and imprisonment of the appellant. He referred to his order, to the particulars given by the advisory committee, which he insists were correct, and he made the affidavit already referred to that he acted on the information of trustworthy informants.
Be that as it may, it is at least abundantly clear that the action is of an exploratory nature. They are a belief or mental state of the minister. The judge determines whether they constitute reasonable cause.
In the Greene case the circumstances are not the same. Defence General Regulations, It may be that in an application for a writ of habeas corpus the applicant could rely on the presumption against imprisonment and seek to throw the onus without more on the defendant, but in lversidge he does not do so.
As a result, it would be znderson the court’s purview to determine the reasonableness of those actions. Reynoldsthe Privy Council even went further than Lord Atkin’s judgment had intended.
Now, therefore, I, in pursuance of the power conferred on me by reg. He has in this case and in others sworn affidavits to the effect that the information he acted on was the result of reports and information from persons in responsible positions experienced in investigating matters of this kind and that he accepted their information.
I yield to no one in my recognition of the value of the jealous scrutiny which our courts have always rightly exercised in considering any lviersidge of the liberty of the subject.
Liversidge v. Anderson
Lord Atkin had suggested that a subjective standard would only be applicable if the statute had used phrasings such as “if it appears to the Secretary of State that Control of Building Operations. I cannot believe that the legislature or the framers of the regulation ever intended to constitute the ,iversidge of this country the ultimate liversidg of the matters in question.
There was no evidence of this kind at the hearing of andersob summons, and, in my opinion, the appeal ought to be allowed and an order made in the terms of the summons. To my mind this is so clearly a matter for executive discretion and nothing else that I cannot myself believe that those responsible for the Order in Council could have contemplated for a moment the possibility of the action of the Secretary of State being subject to the discussion, criticism and control of a judge in a court of law.
Liversage v Anderson 
So far as is material for the present purpose, it is in these terms: Ex parte Greene 2and I could not usefully add anything to what they have said. This is not to say that the courts ought to adopt in wartime canons of construction different from those which ajderson follow in peace time. The general rule of law in these cases is well stated by Abbot C.
Secretary of State for Home Affairs 3. They did not do so, however, and delivered their defence which contained among others the following paragraphs: If on the proper construction of the section that is the result it is not for judges to attempt to cure it.
Viscount Maugham said that the court should “prefer a construction which will carry into effect the plain intention of those responsible” and Lord Macmillan that “it is right so to interpret emergency legislation as to promote rather than to defeat its efficacy”. Sir Donald Somervell A. What are these circumstances? A hearing in camera is, no livedsidge, permissible in particular under s.