Dear Colleagues;
The recent decision of the UKPC on appeal from the Cayman Islands in
Crawford Adjusters & Ors v Sagicor General Insurance (Cayman)
Ltd & Anor [2013] UKPC 17 (13 June 2013)
http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKPC/2013/17.html is a significant change to the law on the tort of malicious prosecution, if followed in other jurisdictions. By 3-2 (Lords Wilson & Kerr, Lady Hale; dissents from Lords Sumption and Neuberger) the Judicial Committee rules that there can be an action for malicious prosecution even in relation to civil proceedings, effectively declining to follow the fairly recent House of Lords decision in Gregory v Portsmouth City Council [2000] 1 AC 419 that the tort should only be available where the previous proceedings were criminal. There is detailed reference to the historical development of the tort and to decisions in other Cth and US jurisdictions; the Victorian decision in Little v Law Institute of Victoria (No 3) [1990] VR 257 was approved by Lord Wilson in the majority. But fascinating and firmly expressed differences of opinion on these matters between the majority and the minority. There is also comment on the tort of "abuse of process", though general agreement on that one. The decision of course is not binding in either England or Australia as such, but will no doubt be influential in further discussions. (Thanks to Harold Luntz for drawing it to my attention.)Regards
Neil
Neil Foster
Associate Professor in Law,
Newcastle Law School;
Faculty of Business & Law
University of Newcastle
Callaghan NSW 2308
AUSTRALIA
Room MC177,