Robert Alderson Wright, Baron Wright, GCMG,PC,FBA (15 October 1869 – 27 June 1964) was a British judge. A commercial barrister, he was a Justice of the High Court from 1925 to 1932, when he was directly promoted to the House of Lords as a law lord. Robert Stevens described him as "one of the few significant British appeal judges of the twentieth century."
At the
1923 General election, he stood as the
Liberal candidate in the
Darlington constituency. The Liberals, who had not contested the seat at the previous election, were not expected to win and he came last. He did not stand for Parliament again.[1]
Judicial career
In 1925, Wright was appointed to the
High Court (
King's Bench Division) as a judge, receiving the customary
knighthood. On 11 April 1932, he was appointed
Lord of Appeal in Ordinary and was created additionally a
life peer with the title Baron Wright, of Durley in the County of Wiltshire. His translation from the High Court directly to the
House of Lords was unusual, and was masterminded by the Lord Chancellor, the
Viscount Sankey. However, he resigned as Lord of Appeal in 1935. becoming instead
Master of the Rolls, a post he held until 1937, when he was made Lord of Appeal in Ordinary again. He retired in 1947, and was appointed
GCMG in 1948.
Wilsons and Clyde Coal Company v English (1937) give due regard to the actual conditions under which men work in a factory or mine, at the long hours and the fatigue, to the slackening of attention which naturally comes from constant repetition of the same operation, to the noise and confusion in which the man works, to his preoccupation in what he is actually doing at the cost perhaps of some inattention to his own safety.
Attorney-General for Canada v Attorney-General for Ontario (1937), where a panel chaired by
Lord Atkin struck down the Canadian New Deal, including the federal social security system and the minimum wage, as he later admitted, Wright dissented. (At that time dissents could not be recorded publicly.) Canada then abandoned appeals to London.
Luxor (Eastborne) Ltd v Cooper (1940) 'the duty of the court is to construe such documents fairly and broadly, without being too astute or subtle in finding defects'
Liversidge v Anderson (1941), while Atkin dissented over the suspension of habeas corpus.
Muir v. Glasgow Corporation, in which he helped clarify the principle of negligence by saying that a duty of care was only breached if somebody did something which was "obviously and inherently dangerous": as the case revolved around a tea-urn, he made the amusing remark that "to introduce a savage animal such as a lion or tiger would be obviously and inherently dangerous, but not a tea-urn"
Fibrosa Spolka Akcyjna v Fairbairn Lawson Combe Barbour Ltd [1943] AC 32, 61, recognising the basis of
unjust enrichment. "It is clear that any civilised system of law is bound to provide remedies for cases of what has been called unjust enrichment or unjust benefit, that is to prevent a man from retaining the money of or some benefit derived from another which it is against conscience that he should keep."
Joyce v DPP [1946] AC 347, the appeal of
William Joyce, aka Lord Haw-Haw, against his conviction of Adherence to the King's enemies without the realm under the
Treason Act 1351.
Arms
Coat of arms of Robert Wright, Baron Wright
Crest
In front of a Demi-Dragon Or the wings semée of Fleur-de-lis Azure a Fasces fesswise Sable
Escutcheon
Azure on a Fess between three Eagles' Heads couped Or a Pale between two Fleurs-de-lis of the first the pale charged with a Fleur-de-lis of the second.
Supporters
On either side a Pegasus Argent the Wings Or semée of Fleurs-de-lis Azure