Glanville Williams

M.J.P.; J.R. Spencer; B.A. Hepple; P.R. Glazebrook; A.T.H. Smith

doi:10.1017/S0008197300098378

^{page 437 note 1} (1933) 5 C.L.J. 105; a note on Hall v. Brooklands Auto Racing Club [1933] 1 K.B. 205.

^{page 437 note 2} See p. 243 above.

^{page 437 note 3} The Independent, 17 April 1997.

^{page 437 note 4} Even within that narrow compass readers might expect to find an appreciation of his work as a law teacher. Such an appreciation, by Peter Glazebrook who succeeded him as Director of Studies at Jesus College, will appear in the S.P. T.L.Reporter.

^{page 440 note 1} Joint Torts and Contributory Negligence (London 1951), p.v.Google Scholar

^{page 440 note 2} Civil Liability Act (1961, No. 44), and see Dail Eireann, Debates, vol. 188, cols. 1588, 1592 et seq.

^{page 440 note 3} “Duties of Non-occupiers in respect of Dangerous Premises” (1942) 5 M.L.R. 194.

^{page 440 note 4} See generally, Reform of the Law (London 1951)Google Scholar, chap. V, and “Some Reforms of the Law of Tort” (1961) 24 M.L.R. 101.

^{page 440 note 5} “Liability for Independent Contractors” [1956] C.L.J. 180.

^{page 440 note 6} “The Effect of Penal Legislation in the Law of Tort” (1960) 23 M.L.R. 233.

^{page 440 note 7} See esp. “The Aims of the Law of Tort” (1951) 4 C.L.P. 137.

^{page 441 note 8} (1961)24 M.L.R. atp.101.

^{page 441 note 9} “A Strange Offspring of Trespass Ab Initio” (1936) 52 L.Q.R. 106.

^{page 441 note 10} “The Risk Principle” (1961) 77 L.Q.R.179, and “Causation in the Law” [1961] C.L.J. 62.

^{page 442 note 11} (1939) 55 L.Q.R 588 at p. 591.

^{page 442 note 12} (1939) 17 Can B.R. 613 at p. 615.

^{page 442 note 13} Liability for Animals (London, 1939) p. 2.Google Scholar

^{page 442 note 14} Op. cit., p. 363.

^{page 442 note 15} Foundations of the Law of Tort, 2nd ed., pp. 123–127.Google Scholar

^{page 442 note 16} See generally, Hepple, B., “Negligence: the Search for Coherence” (1997) 50 CLP. 69.Google Scholar

^{page 443 note 17} (1950) 13M.L.R. 400.

^{page 443 note 18} (1950) 66 L.Q.R. 253.

^{page 443 note 19} Report on Contribution. 1977, Law Com. No. 79.

^{page 443 note 20} See Chitty on Contracts, 27th ed., chap. 17 which refers extensively to Glanville Williams' book.

^{page 443 note 21} (1951) 66 L.Q.R. 528.

^{page 443 note 22} Fleming, , The Law of Torts, 8th ed., p. 55nGoogle Scholar, still refers to it as “the leading treatise”.

^{page 444 note 23} 1994, Law Com. No. 219.

^{page 444 note 24} (1939–41) 7C.L.J. 111.

^{page 444 note 25} Marc Rich & Co. AG v. Bishop Rock Marine Co. Ltd (The Nicholas H) [1996] 2 A.C. 211 at p. 236.Google Scholar

^{page 444 note 26} (1951)4C.L.P. 137.

^{page 445 note 27} Cardozo, B., The Nature of the Judicial Process (New York 1921) 166–167).Google Scholar

^{page 445 note 1} Williams, G.L.Criminal Law: The General Part (London 1953) p. 435;Google Scholar cf. also p. 130. All further page references are, unless otherwise indicated, to this (first) edition.

^{page 446 note 2} pp. 567–587; “The Defence of Necessity” (1953) 6 C.L.P. 216; Sanctity of Life pp. 286–287; “A Commentary on R v. Dudley and Stephens” [1977] Cambrian L.R. 94; “Necessity” [1978] Crim. L.R. 128.

^{page 446 note 3} E.g., pp. 28, 54, 65–66, 77, 108, 230, 242.

^{page 446 note 4} p. 463.

^{page 446 note 5} p. 458.

^{page 446 note 6} p. 125; “Statute Interpretation, Prostitution and the Rule of Law”, in Tapper, C.F.H. (ed.) Crime, Proof and Punishment (London 1981) 71.Google Scholar

^{page 446 note 7} p. 90.

^{page 447 note 8} p. 109.

^{page 447 note 9} “ ‘Rape is Rape’“ [1992] N.L.J. 11.

^{page 447 note 10} [1993] 1 All E.R. 42.

^{page 447 note 11} E.g., pp. 3–7, 477; “What Should the Code do about Omissions?” (1987) 7 L.S. 92; “Letting Offences Happen” [1990] Crim, L.R. 780; “Criminal Omissions—the Conventional View” (1991)Google Scholar 107 L.Q.R. 86.

^{page 447 note 12} “Conspiring to Corrupt”, in Megarry, R.E. (ed.) Law in Action (1965) 71Google Scholar, 76; “Law and Fact” [1976] Crim. L.R. 472, 532; “The Standard of Honesty” [1983] N.L.J. 636.

^{page 447 note 13} “Blackmail” [1954] Crim. L.R. 79.

^{page 448 note 14} pp. 15–16, 19.

^{page 448 note 15} pp. 21, 59, 138.

^{page 448 note 16} pp. 49–51,77–81.

^{page 448 note 17} pp. 29, 87–88; The Mental Element in Crime (Jerusalem 1965) (hereafter M.E.C.) p. 59.

^{page 448 note 18} pp. 35–39; Sanctity of Life, p. 286; M.E.C. pp. 15, 24; and “Oblique Intention” [1987] C.L.J. 417.

^{page 448 note 19} pp. 59–62; M.E.C. pp. 27, 29, 32 and “Intention and Recklessness Again” (1982) 2 L.S. 189.

^{page 448 note 20} pp. 77–81, 355, 691–719.

^{page 448 note 21} pp. 173–174, 719 and “Offences and Defences” (1982) 2 L.S. 189.

^{page 448 note 22} p. 159.

^{page 449 note 23} Chap. 7, passim.

^{page 449 note 24} p. 486; “A Fresh Start with the Law of Attempt” [1980] C.L.J. 225; “The Government's Proposals on Criminal Attempts” [1981] N.L.J. 80, 104, 128.

^{page 449 note 25} pp. 487–503; “Criminal Attempts—A Reply” [1962] Crim. L.R. 300; “Attempting the Impossible— A Reply” (1980) 22 Crim. L.Q. 49.

^{page 449 note 26} p. 183.

^{page 449 note 27} p. 25.

^{page 449 note 28} Lord Denning: Responsibility Before The Law (Jerusalem 1961) passim; Lord Diplock: Gould [1968] 2 Q.B. 65; Sweet v. Parsley [1970] A.C. 132, 163; Hyam [1975] A.C. 55; Caldwell [1982] A.C. 341.

^{page 449 note 29} M.E.C., preface.

^{page 450 note 30} Touched upon at p. 74 (“cruelly”).

^{page 450 note 31} p. 418.

^{page 450 note 32} “The Mens Rea for Murder: Leave It Alone” (1989) 105 L.Q.R. 387.

^{page 450 note 33} Majewski [1977] A.C. 443; Moloney [1985] A.C. 905; Hancock [1986] A.C. 455.

^{page 450 note 34} Westminster City Council v. Croyalgrange Ltd. [1986] 1 W.L.R. 674.

^{page 450 note 35} Majewski [1911] A.C. 443.

^{page 450 note 36} pp. 369, 377, 379, 381.

^{page 450 note 37} O'Connor (1980) 146 C.L.R. 64.

^{page 450 note 38} p. 451.

^{page 450 note 39} [1962] A.C. 220.

^{page 451 note 40} “Conspiring to Corrupt”, in Megarry, R.E. (ed.) Law in Action (1965) p. 71.Google Scholar

^{page 451 note 41} pp. 230–235.

^{page 451 note 42} pp. 383–433.

^{page 451 note 43} pp. 154–202.

^{page 451 note 44} pp. 299–301, 364.

^{page 451 note 45} The Reform of the Law, p. 19; pp. 441–445; M.E.C. pp. 120–121.

^{page 451 note 46} The Reform of the Law, p. 13.

^{page 451 note 47} The Times, 10 June 1952; “Reform of the Criminal Law and its Administration” (1958) 4 J.S.P.T.L. 217.

^{page 452 note 48} “Mistake in the Law of Theft” [1977] C.L.J. 62; “Theft, Consent and Illegality” [1977] Crim. L.R. 127, 205, 327; “Theft and Voidable Title” [1981] Crim. L.R. 666.

^{page 452 note 49} Ten were reprinted at [1991] C.L.J. 1.

^{page 452 note 50} [1952] 2 All E.R. 842.

^{page 452 note 51} p. 122.

^{page 452 note 52} [1939]27 C.A.R. 86; p. 132.

^{page 452 note 53} Hallam [1957] 1 Q.B. 569.

^{page 452 note 54} [1921] 2 K.B. 119; pp. 140–147.

^{page 452 note 55} Gould [1968] 2 Q.B. 65.

^{page 452 note 56} [1952] 2 Q.B. 826; pp. 324–327.

^{page 452 note 57} (1920) 84 J.P. 63; pp. 491–503.

^{page 452 note 58} [1985] A.C. 560.

^{page 452 note 59} [1986] C.L.J. 33–83.

^{page 452 note 60} Shivpuri [1987] A.C. 1.

^{page 452 note 61} pp. 267–274.

^{page 453 note 62} Slatcher v. George Mence Smith Ltd. [1951] 1 K.B. 631.

^{page 453 note 63} p. 244.

^{page 453 note 64} p. 253.

^{page 453 note 65} p. 288.

^{page 453 note 66} p. 310.

^{page 453 note 67} Ibid.

^{page 453 note 68} p. 395; and cf. “The Draft Code and Reliance upon Official Statements” (1989) 9 L.S. 177.

^{page 453 note 69} “The Mens Rea for Murder: Leave it Alone” (1989) 105 L.Q.R. 387,390; and see too “Rationality in Murder” (1991) 11 L.S. 204.

^{page 453 note 70} H.L. Paper (Session 1988–89) 78–1, pp. 121–126.

^{page 454 note 71} “The Criminal Responsibility of Children” [1954] Crim. L.R. 493, 495–196; cited, approvingly, C. v. DPP. [1996] A.C. 1 (Lord Lowry).

^{page 454 note 72} “The Reasonable Man in Provocation” [1954] Crim. L.R. 740, 742.

^{page 454 note 73} “Finis for Novus Actus?” [1989] C.L.J. 391, 397.

^{page 455 note 74} p. 127.

^{page 455 note 75} p. 184.

^{page 455 note 76} p. 208, and “The Fetus and the ‘Right of Life’ ” [1994] C.L.J. 71.

^{page 455 note 77} pp. 161–162; and, e.g., pp. 212, 276.

^{page 456 note 1} 3rd ed. (Stevens and Sons 1963).Google Scholar

^{page 456 note 2} Ibid., p. 302.

^{page 456 note 3} Ibid., p. 200.

^{page 456 note 4} Ibid., p. 128.

^{page 456 note 5} Ibid. p. 80.

^{page 456 note 6} Eleventh Report: Evidence (General), Cmnd. 4991 (1972).

^{page 457 note 7} (1973) Cmnd. 5184 p. 10.

^{page 458 note 8} “Questioning by the Police: Some Practical Considerations” [1960] Crim. L.R. 325; “Police Interrogation, Privileges and Limitations: England” (1961) 52 Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology and Police Science 50.CrossRef Google Scholar

^{page 458 note 9} “Authentication of Statements to the Police” [1979] Crim. L.R. 6.

^{page 458 note 10} “Evidence of Identification: The Devlin Report” [1976] Crim. L.R. 407.

^{page 458 note 11} p. 332.

^{page 458 note 12} “The Corroboration Question” (1987) 137 N.L.J. 131, 132.

^{page 458 note 13} The Proof of Guilt (3rd ed.), p. 334Google Scholar

^{page 459 note 14} “The Logic of Exceptions” [1988] C.L.J. 261.

^{page 459 note 15} “Questioning by the Police: Some Practical Considerations” [1960] Crim. L.R. 325, 341.

^{page 459 note 16} The Proof of Guilt (3rd ed.), pp. 213–243.Google Scholar

^{page 460 note 17} The Proof of Guilt (3rd ed.), pp. 195–209;Google Scholar “The [Criminal Law Revision Committee's] Proposals for Hearsay Evidence” [1973] Crim. L.R. 76.

^{page 461 note 18} “The Tactic of Silence” (1987) 137N.L.J. 1107.

^{page 461 note 19} “The Work of Criminal Law Reform” (1975) 13 Jo. S.P.T.L. 183, 193.

^{page 461 note 20} “Child Witnesses”, in Smith, Peter (ed.) Essays in Honour of J. C. Smith (Butterworths 1987), 188;Google Scholar “Videotaping Children's Evidence” (1987) 137 N.L.J. 108; “The Corroboration Question”, ibid. 131; “More About Videotaping Children” ibid. 369. “Child Witnesses and Video-technology: Thoughts for the Home Office” (1987) 51 Journal of Criminal Law 444CrossRef Google Scholar, though published under my name, was really a joint effort.

^{page 461 note 21} The proceedings were published as Spencer, J.R., Nicholson, G., Flin, R. andBull, R. (eds.),Children's Evidence in Legal Proceedings, an International Perspective (Cambridge Law Faculty 1990).Google Scholar

^{page 461 note 22} Report of the Advisory Group on Video Evidence (Home Office, December 1989).

^{page 462 note 23} See his article “Questioning by the Police: some Practical Considerations” [1960] Crim. L.R. 325, and also his remarks in “The Work of Criminal Law Reform”, (1975) 13 Jo. S.P.T.L. 183, 187.

^{page 462 note 1} [1954] Crim. L.R. 6.

^{page 462 note 2} “Arrest for Felony at Common Law” [1954] Crim. L.R. 408; “Interpretation of Statutory Powers of Arrest Without Warrant” [1958] Crim. L.R. 73,154. He had already written a piece, “Demanding Name and Address” (1950) 66L.Q.R. 465.

^{page 463 note 3} “Statutory Power of Search and Arrest on the Ground of Unlawful Possession” [1960] Crim. L.R. 598.

^{page 463 note 4} 15M.L.R. 98.

^{page 463 note 5} He was one of three dissentients to the 11th Report of the Criminal Law Revision Committee, (1972) Cmnd. 4991, para 52; “The Authentication of Statements to (he Police” [1979] Crim. L.R. 6.

^{page 463 note 6} “The ‘right of silence’ and the mental element” [1988] Crim. L.R. 97; “The tactic of silence” (1977) 137 New Law Jo., 1107.

^{page 463 note 7} [1954] Crim. L.R. 578.

^{page 463 note 8} (1991)54 M.L.R. 408.

^{page 463 note 9} “Criminal Attempts—A Reply” [1962] Crim. L.R. 300.

^{page 463 note 10} “Two Problems in Criminal Attempts” (1957) 70 Harv. L.R. 422; “Two Problems in Criminal Attempts Re-Examined—I and II” [1962] Crim. L.R. 135, 212.

^{page 463 note 11} “Attempting the impossible—the last round?” (1985) 135 New L.J. 337.

^{page 463 note 12} [1985] A.C. 567.

^{page 463 note 13} “The Lords and Impossible Attempts, or Quis Custodies Ipsos Custodes?” [1986] C.L.J. 33.

^{page 464 note 14} [1987] A.C. 1.

^{page 464 note 15} Above, n. 13.

^{page 465 note 16} But one of the seminal works in the field, S.A. de Smith's Judicial Review of Administrative Action began life as a doctoral dissertation begun under Glanville's supervision.

^{page 465 note 17} Criminal Law: The General Part (2nd ed., 1963) § 184.

^{page 465 note 18} “Power to Prosecute” [1955] Crim. L.R. 596, [1956] Crim. L.R. 67.

^{page 465 note 19} “International Law and the Controversy Concerning the Word ‘Law’” (1945) 22 B.Y.B.I.L. 134; “Language and the Law” (1945) 61 L.Q.R. 71, 179, 293, 384; (1946) 62 L.Q.R. 387.

^{page 465 note 20} “Statute Interpretation, Prostitution and the Rule of Law” in Tapper, C.F.H. (ed.), Crime Proof and Punishment (1981) 71;Google Scholar “Law and Fact” [1976] Crim. L.R. 472, 532.

^{page 465 note 21} The Reform of the Law (1951), p. 19.

Article contents

Glanville Williams

Abstract

References

This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by Crossref.

Article contents

Glanville Williams

Abstract

References

Save article to Kindle

Save article to Dropbox

Save article to Google Drive

Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

You have entered the maximum number of contributors

Conflicting interests