Apres Ter. Trin. Anno 37. Eliz. le case ensuant fuit move devant les deux chief
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1665 |
| Date | 01 January 1665 |
| Court | Court of Common Pleas |
English Reports Citation: 123 E.R. 516
DEL COMMON-BANK
II. Aprea Ter. Trin. anno 37. Eliz. ib case enauant fuit move devant lea deux chief Justices le Master de le Rolls, Baron Ewyns & Baron Clerke, per commandment. Le casa fuit que divers Prentises de London & Southwarke, fuerunt commytts a garde pur Ryota et pur fesana de proclamations concernant lea prises de vytails : ascun de queux fuerunt aiudge en le Starr Chamber d'estre myse sur le pillor & whipp: apres quel divers anters prentises & un Grant de Woxbridge con-[5]-apire ensemble a toller & deliver ceux prentises hors de gard a tuer le Mayor de London, arser son meae, & da enfreinder deux meaens nere a le Towre ou fuerunt divers weapons & arms pur 300. persons & la de furnish eux de ceo : apres quel divers de les prentiaea devise libella movant autera de prende part en ceux lour devises & de assembler a Bun-hill & Tower-hill, accordant a quel divers de eux assemble a Bun-hill & 300. a Tower, ou ils avoint Trumpet & un que tient sur un powle vn cloke en Hew de vn Flagge et en alant vers le meae le Mayor les vicounts & le Swordbearer de London oue auters offer a resist; encounter queux ceux prentises efferent force & violence ; sur ceo matter si ceo fuit Treson ou...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Roy v Kensington and Chelsea and Westminster Family Practitioner Committee
...in so far as they have exercised a discretion (as they may require to do in considering questions of reasonableness under section 17(1) ( 2) and (4)), the exercise can be impugned on the principles set out in the judgment of Lord Greene M.R. in Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd. v. W......
-
Lawrence Wheatley v Raishauna Wheatley
...the powers of the court under sections 23, 24 and 25 of the Act, it follows that grounds (y) and (z) succeed to the extent that paragraphs 2 and 4 of the order made by the court below are outside of the competence of that court and are accordingly set aside. On the other hand, the order num......
-
Houghton v Arms
...of the FT Act? As a general proposition, and as Lord Rodger of Earlsferry stressed inStandard Chartered Bank v Pakistan Shipping Corpn (Nos 2 and 4)28, in the world of tort the status of an individual as an employee does not divest that person of personal liability for wrongful acts committ......
-
D (A) v Refugee Applications Commissioner and Others
...evidence which would "confirm" the cause of her injuries. 70 (v) An adverse credibility inference was drawn from minor inconsistencies (4.2. 2 and 4.2.5 of the ORAC report) despite the medical evidence that coherence could not be expected: 71 (vi) Adverse credibility findings were made that......