Results: 24

  • Windsor Education Board v Ford Motor Co Of Canada Ltd

    30 Jul 1941 [1941] AC 453, PC

    RATINGCanada (ontario)Rating
  • International Railway Co v Niagara Parks Commission

    28 Apr 1941 [1941] AC 328, PC

    Subsequent citations: 7.
    CONTRACTCanada (ontario)Contract
  • Dairen Kisen Kabushiki Kaisha v Shiang Kee (Otherwise Known As The China Merchants Steam Navigation Co Ltd)

    20 May 1941 [1941] AC 373, PC

    COMPANYHong kongCompany
  • Benham v Gambling

    16 Dec 1940 [1941] AC 157, HL

    Subsequent considerations : 4 positive; 5 neutral; 2 negative. Subsequent citations: 17.
    DAMAGESNegligenceDeath of injured child
  • Hoani Te Heuheu Tukino v Aotea District Maori Land Board

    03 Apr 1941 [1941] AC 308, PC

    Subsequent considerations : 1 positive. Subsequent citations: 11.
    LANDNew zealandNative lands
  • Potts v Hickman

    09 Dec 1940 [1941] AC 212, HL

    Subsequent citations: 3.
    LANDLORD AND TENANTArrears of rentDistress for rates under justice's warrant
  • Canada Rice Mills Ltd v Union Marine and General Insurance Co Ltd

    24 Sep 1940 [1941] AC 55; 67 Ll L Rep 549; [1940 4 All ER 169, PC

    Subsequent considerations : 2 positive; 1 negative. Subsequent citations: 7.
    INSURANCECanada (british columbia)Insurance (Marine)
  • East Suffolk Rivers Catchment Board v Kent

    09 Dec 1940 [1941] AC 74, HL

    Subsequent considerations : 3 positive; 2 neutral; 3 negative. Subsequent citations: 31.
    WATERLand drainageBreach in wall on bank of tidal river
  • Secretary Of State For India v Sardar Rustam Khan

    28 Apr 1941 [1941] AC 356, PC

    Subsequent citations: 2.
    INTERNATIONAL LAWTreatyNative State
  • Luxor (Eastbourne) Ltd v Cooper

    12 Dec 1940 [1941] AC 108, HL(E)

    Subsequent considerations : 5 positive; 3 neutral; 1 negative. Subsequent citations: 45.
    PRINCIPAL AND AGENTAgent to receive commission if he effects saleRight of principal to sell.
    Dec. 12. VISCOUNT SIMON L.C. My Lords, in this case the respondent, who was plaintiff in the action, issued his writ in April, 1937, claiming from each of the two appellant companies a sum of 5000 l. as commission alleged to be due under an oral agreement made in September, 1935. Alternatively, he claims the same amount as damages for breach of this agreement. The trial judge, Branson J., decided in favour of the appellants, but the Court of Appeal reversed this decision and gave judgment in favour of the respondent for a total sum of 8000 l. as damages

We use cookies on this website, you can read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. To use website as intended please Accept Cookies