Judgment · High Court · 2011
Judgment
Its.p ‘1I ..• I’P’ I! ‘. ir- • -‘ ,iI • ! • •. p i :. £ ;j fl .E. Li • • t3..’ ‘‘ •‘ •‘ ) 0 * 0 ’ 0 0 > a ! 2 2 C C 0 0 2 2 O oH C t i - S 0 0 t i 0 0 2 2 2 2 S t i 5 9 0 > 0 H t i C - t t i C t i - C 4 * < i : C C X C m C c i i _ t i t i H C C D > D C - < 2 2 4 - 4 : 0 4 C t i t i C C H o g 2 ( i 2 L o g r Z 0 ( o 2 0 H 2 0 2 0 2 0 H 4 9 C C ’ a N C ( 0 ) ( ) 2 0 N 4 r f 0 t r r c o g H . 2 0 o g 2 0 0 7 ( 4 - 0 o tC 0 ( — Z i L 0 o g ) * 4 ) 3 ( 0 o g I S 2 0 o g o g H i i L L o3 g , t o 4 4 - 0 ( o g 1 < o g H ) ( 4 * 4 o g c t C i 0 ( L C i — L H 0 ( H * 4 * 4 o g . H o g t i 0 ( H 4 4 4 I S * i _ c 04 4 4 0 2 ( o g — < H 4 o 4 g ) ’ a 0 ( o g 2 0 H i t D C 0 ( oHH4 g 4 * t i 4 0g o 4 - o4 g ) C a 2 0 o g i S o g t i oH< C C0( 2 o g t i 0 ( o g 1 £ 2 2 2 0 )H O f o o g 4 - t J - o g i S ° 0 t i o g g ; .! t i t i o4( g 0 o g t i o g o g ) i S H . 4 4 - D C t i 0 ( t i , a 2 0 2 0 t i 1— 2 0 * 4 4 0 0 o 0 2 0 2 0 , a o 4g , t t i o g 2 0 t r 4 9 9 2 2 o g t i o g 2 0 t C 9 o g , o g o g o g H D C : ) a o g 2 0 o g H 4 0 o g o g 0 . i S - o g o g H 2 0 0 ( 4 2 t i 2 0 ’ a D C D C o 4 4 4 3 * c c ) i C 0 0 ( 2 0 o g 3 4 2H ( n * 4 * 4 t 4 0 F o 2 0 o g 0 o g 2 0 o g o g — D C o g — 4 o g < 0 l f ) * 4 t r o g i o L g 0 * ( 2 2 t r o4 g i L , a o g 4 4 4 2 ( 4 4 3 4 2 - 0 C i S 4 - D C o g 0 ( o g 9 ) C 0 ( o g ° 0 0 o g H 4 4 4 — — 9 0 $ o g 0 t r ’ a o g —( 0 t i H 2 2 2 0 0 * ( — 2 0 t o o 2 2 4 3 4 t i D C 0 ( o 2 0 4 ( o : 2 ( 9 0 o g t r 0 ( 9 0 * ( 4 - i L t r o t C 4 4 0 ( 2 0 o g t i t i - 0 4 * ( 4 4 4 o g o g t i 9 0 D C 0 ( 1 < 0 ( ) a t0 i o g t i 4 4 4 20S i ( t i 0 ( o g 2 0 o g t f O * 9 o g i S 2 0 o g 9 H o4 g 2 o g 2 0 H 0 , a o g 0H ( t o 0i 0g t i 2 S0 )0 000 * 0 4 H 4 3 0 ( o t 0 * ( , t o g L i 2 0 i r C C ’ a — 4 0 ( o g 2 0 ’ a 0 ( 2 H 2 o g ’ a H 9 H 0 ( o g 2 0 o g . •H 0 ( 0 t( 0 o C 2 0 2 0 S C C C i C L r C C ’ i C L C t C U C C P U C - C C U C a C - C C ) H U = U ) U H C C C C D C C C U t r U — C C C C — ) U U U ” C U 9 C C U ” U C C C — - n e C D C = n i C U C ) . = U U 0 0 i “ L “ C 9 C “ ) U - D C ) U n i t C . c ) * 9 - “ - - . C U C C l C U : J = r C ) C U C U C U , — , : 5 6 j C * c C C — — ” C C . U R C U n C U U C ) U , “ t ” C C 9 v r ) C U - n e ( ( ) U D C U 9 O Q U D C C ’ C C C 2 , 9 ) ) U . U U D C C ( C U r C 9 ) U ) C U ” U ) C D C j 9 ) U C = C U C U ) ( U — j U D C ) ’ U C D C C 9 U — C U t r ) C 9 C U C C C U P U C C C U — 9 ’ C C 9 I p C : ) 9 ) l C . ’ 9 C L 6 C ) U i C C t r ” U C 4 . , C H - U C D C C C C U C n C U C ’ C < — D C C U U C C ’ P U C C — C C ” C U C D C ” C ” C ’ C “ — U ” C - D C D C C 5 C U C C 5 C C C C C D C C C “ U C C ’ C ) C U U C C C C j C j D C — C - , 9 r . _ C ” C C % H C - - C ” C - C U i C L ’ C C ’ C U ) D C U U D C ( 0 - 0 - = C C ’ C ) C U U D C * — C — 9 — H l C ” C i C C ) U ‘ U U c , 9 = C C ” C C C C C C r C C i L 2 C ) ) U U C C C U — = U C - D C 0 C D C C H D ( ) ) U C U C C > t ) ” C C < > C * — U U ’ C ” U C U = C C C U C ’ C C U C . U D C 4 r C ” U 9 D C ) l D C C U C ” C ” C C C U j ’ C U ) C U D C ) U U * r l D C C = C C ) D C U U C C 9 ) U 9 C - t r ” i D ” C 9 U C D — C 9 C U C “ - ” C C U = C U 6 C . U D ” U C C U C t r U — U D C 9 D C ” C ” C C C U C * r D U U p t r U C C U ( U U D C , 9 ” U C t U C ó — 4 9 ) ) C C ) k A C B A < L C ) ) C i S 2 $ c D C C B a L C t 9 — t D C 2 $ ) C P ) l C i c - L E A - t r D C r C C B — o0 t A . A A A - ) C i - ) C P ) C 1 $ i c o i c - 0 i c A _ c ) C k i c L C 2 0 2 $ : ) A i c ) N ” H 0 ) l A A - i p i c A i c 4 - ‘ 4 J L d — . , i c c d 4 A A L C B J ( 2 ( 2 * r p 2 2 0 ) . B 2 $ ) s C i c C C r C i i ) — 0 A A - ) k 2 i c
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.