Allcard v Skinner

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date1886
Date1886
CourtChancery Division
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
314 cases
  • Re The Estate of Brocklehurst, deceased
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 30 Junio 1977
    ...different in nature from those proved to have existed in such 19th century classic cases as Huguenin v. Baseley (1807) 14 Vesey 273, Allcard v. Skinner (1883) 36 Chancery Division 145 and in the fairly recent case of in re Craig, (1971) Chancery 95. For me, this decides the 46Even if a rel......
  • Lee Nellie v Wong Lai Kay
    • Singapore
    • High Court (Singapore)
    • 8 Marzo 1990
    ... ... long time before taking legal action, and her claim should be barred by laches, for her delay in asserting her right, and he cited Allcard v Skinner (1887) 36 Ch D 145. Her explanation for this, which I accept, was that for a long time the defendant did not actually refuse to retransfer ... ...
  • Nature Resorts Ltd v First Citizens Bank Ltd
    • United Kingdom
    • Privy Council
    • 4 Abril 2022
    ...of a transaction between A and B (or, in a three-party situation, between A and a third party, C). 11 Ever since Allcard v Skinner (1887) 36 Ch D 145, it has been commonplace to divide undue influence into two categories: actual and presumed. But in Etridge the House of Lords made clear tha......
  • The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc v Chandra
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 28 Enero 2010
    ...there can be no exhaustive definition of such means. The circumstances of human life are too varied to allow it. Lindley LJ observed in Allcard v Skinner (1887) 36 Ch D 145 at 183 that “no court has ever attempted to define undue influence”, to which Lord Clyde added in Etridge at para 92, ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
26 books & journal articles
  • Subject Index
    • United Kingdom
    • International Journal of Evidence & Proof, The No. 7-4, December 2003
    • 1 Diciembre 2003
    ...Kingdom, ApplicationNo. 48539/99, 5 November 2002.................................................. 137–41Allcard v Skinner [1887] LR 36 ChD 145....................................... 224, 225, 233Anderson v Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 US242 (1986) ...........................................9A......
  • English Influences on the Historical Development of Fiduciary Duties in Scottish Law
    • United Kingdom
    • Edinburgh Law Review No. , January 2014
    • 1 Enero 2014
    ...Ch D 500; Hoblyn v Hoblyn (1889) LR 41 Ch D 200; Liles (n 90) at 683 per Lord Esher MR. See also the infamous Allcard v Skinner (1887) LR 36 Ch D 145, accepted as Scottish law by Gloag: W M Gloag, The Law of Contract, 2nd edn (1929) 528. The next stage of development was to be with respect ......
  • Table of cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Bank and Customer Law in Canada. Second Edition
    • 19 Junio 2013
    ...(4th) 1, 2000 CanLII 22477 (Ont. S.C.J.) ................................................................. 220 Allcard v. Skinner (1887), 36 Ch. D. 145 (C.A.) ..........................................209, 214 Alnu Electric Ltd. v. CIBC Mortgage Corp. (1995), 165 N.B.R. (2d) 149, 424 A.P.R.......
  • VITIATING FACTORS IN CONTRACT LAW — THE INTERACTION OF THEORY AND PRACTICE
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 1998, December 1998
    • 1 Diciembre 1998
    ...under the Sub-Section entitled “Linkages Amongst Economic Duress, Undue Influence and Unconscionability”, infra. 234 See ibid. 235 (1887) 36 ChD 145. 236 Sec the Sub-Section entitled “Linkages Amongst the Categories of Undue Influence”, infra. 237 [1996] 2 SLR 379. 238 This is, of course, t......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT