Attorney-General v Wilts United Dairies [1921] 37 TLR 884
Country:
United Kingdom
Reviewed By Oxbridge Law Team
Updated 2024-01-04 07:14:06 UTC
HL held that a charge imposed by the ministry of food on a company to collect food in certain areas of the country was a tax and that the ministry had no right to impose it without the consent of parliament, under the Bill of Rights article 4.
The 1916 Act of parliament giving the food controller various powers did not include a right of raising taxes and therefore the tax was illegal.
Any comments or edits about this case?
Get in touch Similar cases
Padfield v Minister of Agriculture
The Minister had power to direct an investigation in respect of any complaint as to the operation of any marketing scheme for agricultural produce. Milk producers complained about the price paid by t...
British Railways Board and Another v Pickin
Parliament made an act that prevented land reverting to landowners once a railway company who had compulsorily purchased the land, decided to discontinue the line, as had previously been the case. A...
R (Gillan) v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis
The police were given the power to stop and search people in connection with articles on terrorism. Two people who were stopped sought judicial review of the authorisation by the minister of the poli...
R v Soneji
Failure by a judge to consider whether there were exceptional circumstances to extend a confiscation order, so that Defendant challenged it under judicial review. HL held that the correct approach to...
IRC v McGuckian
The new development was not based on a linguistic analysis of the meaning of particular words in a statute. It was founded on a broad purposive interpretation, giving effect to the intention of Parli...
Ambitious and intelligent students
choose Oxbridge Notes.
- Customer Support
- Sellers FAQ
- Contact Us
- Privacy Policy
- Terms and Conditions
©2024 Oxbridge Notes. All right reserved.