Shubtill v Director of Public Prosecutions

Revision as of 18:14, 18 October 2022 by Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{cn}}<center>In the Court of Appeal <br> {{cite|R|Langley|2022|JCLR|46}}</center> <br><br> {{right|{{Cocklecarrot}}}} For nearly 200 years, the National Gallery has stood on...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

For nearly 200 years, the National Gallery has stood on the north boundary of London’s Trafalgar Square. Originally conceived by Parliamentary Commission to “give the people an ennobling enjoyment” the building has in its time, seen great change, and witnessed events of great significance, fair and foul. We dare say the goings on of Friday 14th October will not linger over the aeons: fairer things, and fouler ones, will soon wipe them from the collective memory, as a stout sponge might remove carelessly spilt soup. But alas, these events are on our agenda for todays proceedings, so, tiresome as they undoubtedly are, it falls to me to recount them On Friday, in room 43 of London's National Gallery, two young women opened cans of tomato soup and threw their contents onto Vincent van Gogh’s Sunflowers.

The Jolly Contrarian Law Reports
Our own, snippy, in-house court reporting service.
Editorial Board of the JCLR: Managing Editor: Lord Justice Cocklecarrot M.R. · General Editor: Sir Jerrold Baxter-Morley, K.C. · Principle witness: Mrs. Pinterman

Common law | Litigation | Contract | Tort |

Click ᐅ to expand:
Tell me more
Sign up for our newsletter — or just get in touch: for ½ a weekly 🍺 you get to consult JC. Ask about it here.
In the Court of Appeal
R v Langley [2022] JCLR 46