University of Reading Case Study

University of Reading Case Study
Researching Case Law Developments Online [Westlaw UK exercise]
Formative assessment - Questions
1. Locate and read the case report for Burns v Burns [1984] Ch. 317 on Westlaw UK. In which court
was this case heard?
a. County Court
b. Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
c. Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
d. High Court (Chancery Division)
e. House of Lords
f. Lands Tribunal
2. According to the court, might Burns v Burns have been decided differently if the parties had
been married?
a. Yes, the court would have had jurisdiction to make an order under the Matrimonial Causes
Act 1973
b. No, the same legal principles in determining plaintiff’s interest in the house would have
applied irrespective of marital status
c. It is not clear, because no opinion was given on this point
3. Using the Case Analysis information on Westlaw UK, which one of the following cases was NOT
cited in Burns v Burns [1984] Ch. 317?
a. Bernard v Josephs [1982] Ch. 391
b. Diwell v Farnes [1959] 1 W.L.R. 624
c. Falconer v Falconer [1970] 1 W.L.R. 1333
d. Gissing v Gissing [1971] A.C. 886
e. Hine v Hine [1962] 1 W.L.R 1124
f. Pettitt v Pettitt [1970] A.C. 777
4. Of the following cases, which was the earliest in which Burns v Burns [1984] Ch. 317 was
judicially cited?
a. Balfour v Balfour [1919] 2 K.B. 571
b. Bristol and West Building Society v Henning [1985] 1 W.L.R. 778
c. Gow v Grant [2012] UKSC 29
d. Grant v Edwards [1986] Ch. 638
e. Winkworth v Edward Baron Development Co Ltd (1986) 52 P. & C.R. 67
f. Young v Young (Equitable Interests) [1984] Fam. Law 271
5. In which case was Burns v Burns [1984] Ch. 317 distinguished?
a. Balfour v Balfour [1919] 2 K.B. 571
b. Grant v Edwards [1986] Ch. 638
c. Layton v Martin [1986] 2 F.L.R. 227
d. Stack v Dowden [2007] UKHL 17
e. Windeler v Whitehall (1990) 154 J.P. 29
f. Young v Young (Equitable Interests) [1984] Fam. Law 271
6. How many cases have applied Burns v Burns [1984] Ch. 317?
a. None
b. 2
c. 3
d. 4
e. 20
f. 24
7. Can a formal law report of the judgment in Windeler v Whitehall (1990) 154 J.P. 29 be read on
Westlaw UK?
a. Yes, a formal law report of the judgment in this case can be read in full on Westlaw UK
b. No, Westlaw UK does not provide the full-text of any of the formal law reports of this case to
read
8. In total, how many House of Lords and Supreme Court cases have cited Burns v Burns [1984] Ch.
317?
a. None
b. 1
c. 2
d. 3
e. 4
f. 6
9. How was the decision in Burns v Burns [1984] Ch. 317 treated by the House of Lords in Stack v
Dowden [2007] UKHL 17?
a. It was overruled
b. It was distinguished on the facts
c. It was applied
d. It was followed
e. It was considered
f. It was mentioned
1. Locate and read the case report for Burns v Burns [1984] Ch. 317 on Westlaw UK. In which
court was this case heard?
Selected
Answer:
Correct
Answer:
Response
Feedback:
b.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
b.
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Yes, correct. The report is of a civil case heard in the Court of Appeal,
as stated both at the top of the case report and in the initial search result for
the case.
2. According to the court, might Burns v Burns have been decided differently if the parties had
been married?
Selected
Answer:
Correct
Answer:
Response
Feedback:
b.
No, the same legal principles in determining plaintiff’s interest in the house
would have applied irrespective of marital status
a.
Yes, the court would have had jurisdiction to make an order under the
Matrimonial Causes Act 1973
Sorry, incorrect. Read the judgments closely. In his judgment, Lord Justice Fox
notes, "The court has no jurisdiction to make such order as it might think fair;
the powers conferred by the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 in relation to the
property of married persons do not apply to unmarried couples." The same
distinction is also drawn in the opening paragraph of Lord Justice May's
judgment.
3.
Using the Case Analysis information on Westlaw UK, which one of the following cases was
NOT cited in Burns v Burns [1984] Ch. 317?
Selected
Answer:
Correct
Answer:
Response
Feedback:
b.
Diwell v Farnes [1959] 1 W.L.R. 624
e.
Hine v Hine [1962] 1 W.L.R 1124
Sorry, incorrect. For the correct answer, make sure you are referring to the All
Cases Cited listing in the Case Analysis, not the Significant Cases Cited or the
Cases Citing. Neither Diwell v Farnes or Bernard v Josephs are listed in the
Significant Cases Cited but both are included in the All Cases Cited listing. The
correct answer, Hine v Hine, does not appear in the All Cases Cited listing.
4. Of the following cases, which was the earliest in which Burns v Burns [1984] Ch. 317 was
judicially cited?
Selected
Answer:
Correct
Answer:
Response
Feedback:
f.
Young v Young (Equitable Interests) [1984] Fam. Law 271
f.
Young v Young (Equitable Interests) [1984] Fam. Law 271
Yes, correct. The All Cases Citing listing is initially ordered by date, with the most
recent case citing Burns v Burns at the top. The earliest cases therefore appear
at the bottom of this listing, with Young v Young (Equitable Interests) second
from bottom and the earliest to cite Burns v Burns of the options given. For your
information, the judgment in the unreported case listed last - Philip Lowe
(Chinese Restaurant) Limited v Sau Man Lee - is out of correct time sequence
due to a database error, and was in fact not given until 9 July 1985.
5.
In which case was Burns v Burns [1984] Ch. 317 distinguished?
Selected
Answer:
b.
Grant v Edwards [1986] Ch. 638
Correct
Answer:
c.
Layton v Martin [1986] 2 F.L.R. 227
Response
Feedback:
Sorry, incorrect. The simplest way to get the correct answer is to sort the list
of All Cases Citing by Judicial Treatment, with negative treatments grouped
together first. On doing so, you'll see with a single case, Layton v
Martin [1986] 2 F.L.R. 227, listed under the "Distinguished" heading at the
top.
6. How many cases have applied Burns v Burns [1984] Ch. 317?
Selected
Answer:
Correct
Answer:
Response
Feedback:
e.
20
b.
2
Sorry, incorrect. The simplest way to get the correct answer is to sort the list
of All Cases Citing (24 cases at present) by Judicial Treatment. You'll then see
cases grouped together by judicial treatment, with two cases under the
heading "Applied": Windeler v Whitehall (1990) 154 J.P. 29 and Young v Young
(Equitable Interests) [1984] Fam. Law 271.
7.
Can a formal law report of the judgment in Windeler v Whitehall (1990) 154 J.P. 29 be read
on Westlaw UK?
Selected
Answer:
b.
No, Westlaw UK does not provide the full-text of any of the formal law
reports of this case to read
Correct
Answer:
b.
No, Westlaw UK does not provide the full-text of any of the formal law
reports of this case to read
Response
Feedback:
Yes, correct. None of the three law report citations on the Case Analysis page
for Windeler v Whitehall is an active link, meaning those particular reports are
not provided on Westlaw UK. Only a brief case digest summarising the
judgment is provided on the Case Analysis page. For your information, you'll
find the Family Law Reports (F.L.R.) available on the Library's Family Law
Online database, and both the Family Court Reports (F.C.R.) and Justice of the
Peace Reports (J.P.) on LexisLibrary.
8. In total, how many House of Lords and Supreme Court cases have cited Burns v Burns [1984]
Ch. 317?
Selected
Answer:
Correct
Answer:
Response
Feedback:
e.
4
e.
4
Yes, correct. Sorting All Cases Citing by Court shows Burns v Burns has been
cited a total of 4 times in the House of Lords and Supreme Court, in Winkworth v
Edward Baron Development Co Ltd [1986] 1 W.L.R. 1512, Lloyds Bank Plc v
Rosset [1991] 1 A.C. 107, Stack v Dowden [2007] UKHL 17 and, most
recently, Gow v Grant [2012] UKSC 29.
9. How was the decision in Burns v Burns [1984] Ch. 317 treated by the House of Lords in Stack v
Dowden [2007] UKHL 17?
Selected
Answer:
Correct
Answer:
Response
Feedback:
d.
It was followed
f.
It was mentioned
Sorry, incorrect. Look carefully down the All Cases Citing list for Burns v
Burns for the entry relating to Stack v Dowden [2007] UKHL 17. Above this entry,
the indication of the nature of the judicial treatment in the case is stated in bold
- "Mentioned by". To understand the legal reasoning and context in which the
case was mentioned, and so assess any developments impacting on Burns v
Burns in Stack v Dowden, you would need to read the actual judgment of the
House of Lords in the case.

Download Report