Foreign Judgements

CAMPBELL DISCOUNT COMPANY LTD V BRIDGE

CAMPBELL DISCOUNT COMPANY LTD V BRIDGE Citations: [1962] 2 WLR 439, [1962] 1 All ER 385, [1962] AC 600 Coram: Radcliffe, Morton, Devlin, Denning LL Ratio: The parties disputed the validity of a clause in a car hire contract relating to the consequences of a breach. Held: (Majority) The agreement had been terminated by breach

DARIO CALIGARA V GIOVANNI SARTORI AND COMPANY LIMITED

HIGH COURT OF LAGOS 18th September, 1961 DARIO CALIGARA (Plaintiff) V. GIOVANNI SARTORI AND COMPANY LIMITED (Defendant) Coram: Sowemimo J. A. COMPANY LAW 1. Pre-incorporation Contract–are pre-incorporation contracts binding on the company? The law is that “A Company is not bound by contracts purporting to be entered into on its behalf by its promoters or

P. Venugopala Pillai vs V. Thirunavukkarasu And Ors.(Full Text)

MADRAS HIGH COURT Citations: (1948) 2 MLJ 155 P. Venugopala Pillai vs V. Thirunavukkarasu And Ors. JUDGMENT P.V. Rajamannar, Officiating C.J. 1. This appeal relates to two coconut gardens situated in Lloyds Road and Sullavan’s Garden Road, Mylapore, in the City, which admittedly belong to plaintiffs 1 to 3 who are respondents 1 to

INGRAM V LITTLE(Abridged)

Ingram V Little Citation: [1961] 1 QB 31, [1960] EWCA Civ 1 Coram: Pearce LJ and Devlin LJ Facts: “About 2.15 p.m. the rogue Hutchinson called at the house where the two Misses Ingram and Miss Badger were living. He was, I think, actually admitted by Miss Hilda Ingram. Ha told her he was Hutchinson,

N. Joachimson (a firm) v Swiss Bank(Abridged)

SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE COURT OF APPEAL Citation(s) [1921] 3 KB 110; (1921) 6 Ll L Rep 435; [1921] All ER Rep 92; (1921) 125 LT 338 Coram: Atkin LJ, Bankes LJ, Warrington LJCorporation N. Joachimson (a firm) v Swiss Bank Subject: Bank account, limitation periods Joachimson v Swiss Bank Corporation [1921] 3 KB 110 is a

KIRKHAM v. ATTENBOROUGH

SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE COURT OF APPEAL KIRKHAM v. ATTENBOROUGH Sale of Goods – Contract – Sale or Return – Transfer of Property as between Seller and Buyer – Pledge of Goods -“Act adopting the Transaction” – Sale of Goods Act, 1893 (56 & 57 Vict. c. 71), s. 18, r. 4(a). Where a person.

KURSELL V TIMBER OPERATORS AND CONTRACTORS LTD

COURT OF APPEAL [1927] 1 K. B.928 KURSELL v TIMBER OPERATORS AND CONTRACTORS, LIMITED. Sale of Goods-Contract for Sale of uncut Timber in Latvian Forest-Timber to be cut when Ripe-Cutting to be completed and Timber removed within fifteen Years-Possession taken by Purchasers-Subsequent Expropriation of Forest by Latvian Government-“Specific goods”-Frustration of Contract-Sale of Goods Act,

LEWIS V AVERAY

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE. COURT OF APPEAL. Before: THE MASTER OF THE ROLLS (Lord Denning) LORD JUSTICE PHILLIMORE and LORD JUSTICE MEGAW. (Appeal by defendant from order of His Honour Deputy Judge Ellison at Bromley County Court on 15th January, 1971) BETWEEN KEITH LODER LEWIS (Plaintiff) AND ANTHONY JOHN AVERAY (Defendant) Mr. Lewis

LEE V BUTLER

SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE COURT OF APPEAL LEE v. BUTLER Sale of Goods-Factors Acts-Possession of Goods under Agreement to Purchase – Furniture – Hire and Purchase Agreement – Factors Act, 1889 (52 & 53 Vict. c. 45), ss. 2, 9 – Dispositions by Sellers and Buyers of Goods. By the Factors Act, 1889, s. 2,

LOWE V LOMBANK LTD(abridged)

LOWE V LOMBANK LTD Citation: [1960] 1 WLR 196 Coram: Diplock J A false statement made about a matter of past fact could not operate either as an estoppel by representation or (where the fact is expressed as an agreement) a contractual estoppel. The court set out three criteria for an evidential estoppel: it must