Oppenheimer v Cattermole
1976 English judicial decision / From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dear Wikiwand AI, let's keep it short by simply answering these key questions:
Can you list the top facts and stats about Oppenheimer v Cattermole?
Summarize this article for a 10 year old
Oppenheimer v Cattermole [1976] AC 249 is a judicial decision of the English courts relating to whether English law should refuse to recognise Nazi era laws relating to the appropriation of Jewish property. The courts considered the question whether the Nazi law was so iniquitous that it should refuse to recognise it as law, thus raising the "connection between the concepts of law and morality".[1]
Oppenheimer v Cattermole | |
---|---|
Court | House of Lords |
Full case name | Oppenheimer v Cattermole (HM Inspector of Taxes), Nothman v Cooper (HM Inspector of Taxes) |
Decided | 5 February 1975 |
Citation(s) | [1976] AC 249, [1975] 2 WLR 347, [1975] 1 All ER 538, [1975] STC 91, [1975] TR 13 |
Transcript(s) | BAILII |
Case history | |
Prior action(s) | [1972] Ch 585 (Oppenheimer v Cattermole) [1975] 2 WLR 347 (Nothman v Cooper) |
Court membership | |
Judge(s) sitting | Lord Hailsham of St Marylebone Lord Hodson Lord Pearson Lord Cross of Chelsea Lord Salmon |
Keywords | |
Public policy, conflict of laws |
The respondent, Frederick Cattermole, was HM Inspector of Taxes.
In the House of Lords, Lord Cross of Chelsea famously held:
a law of this sort constitutes so grave an infringement of human rights that the courts of this country ought to refuse to recognise it as a law at all.[2]