Ashburn Anstalt v Arnold

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Date1987
CourtCourt of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
94 cases
  • Cheng Hang Guan v Perumahan Farlim (Penang) Sdn Bhd
    • Malaysia
    • High Court (Malaysia)
    • 1 January 1993
  • Teo Siew Peng and Another v Neo Hock Pheng and Others
    • Singapore
    • High Court (Singapore)
    • 21 September 1998
    ...an interest in land binding on a purchaser even though he has notice of the licence (per Fox LJ at p 159 of Ashburn Anstalt v Arnold [1988] 2 All ER 147). Thus, it would not be an interest in land within the meaning of s 104(1) [now s 115(1)] of the Act which entitles protection by a caveat......
  • Jamaica Public Service Company Ltd v Rose Marie Samuels
    • Jamaica
    • Court of Appeal (Jamaica)
    • 28 September 2012
    ...that the person taking title may be bound by a contractual licence if his conscience is bound. The English Court of Appeal, in Ashburn Anstalt v Arnold and Another [1989] Ch 1, after a comprehensive review of the relevant authorities, ruled that certain principles enunciated in Errington v ......
  • Lethe Estate Ltd and Great River Rafting and Plantation Tour Ltd v Jamaica Public Services Company Ltd
    • Jamaica
    • Supreme Court (Jamaica)
    • 23 February 2018
    ...for the defendant Cases referred: Jamaica Public Service Company Ltd. v. Samuels [2012] J.M.C.A. Civ. 42 Anstalt v. Arnold and another [1989] Ch 1 Chaudhary v. Yavuz [2012] 2 All E.R. 418 Hussain and another v. Lancaster City Council [1999] 4 All E.R. 125 Jaggard v. Sawyer and another ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
12 books & journal articles
  • THE (QUISTCLOSE) RESULTING TRUST AS A PROPRIETARY RESPONSE TO UNJUST ENRICHMENT
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 2014, December 2014
    • 1 December 2014
    ...564 and Ex parte Dumas(1754) 2 Ves Sen 582. 30[1975] 1 WLR 758. 31 The rights of contractual licensors of land (Ashburn Anstalt v Arnold[1989] 1 Ch 1), copyright covenantees entitled to royalty payments (Barker v Strickney[1919] 1 KB 121), and beneficiaries of negative pledge clauses (Fire ......
  • Overriding Interests: Occupation of Part of the Land
    • United Kingdom
    • The Modern Law Review No. 63-1, January 2000
    • 1 January 2000
    ...nor an interest protected by an entry on the register, cannevertheless be binding upon a transferee for value of a registered estate.185 [1989] Ch 1.6 [1989] Ch 1, 28 per Fox LJ (delivering the judgment of the court).7 The aspect of the Asburn Anstalt case raised in Ferrishurt Ltd vWallhurs......
  • Undue Influence in the House of Lords: Principles and Proof
    • United Kingdom
    • The Modern Law Review No. 65-3, May 2002
    • 1 May 2002
    ...9 OJLS 285 and P. D. Finn, ‘The Fiduciary Principle’, in T.G. Youdan (ed), Equity,Fiduciaries and Trusts (Toronto: Carswell, 1989) ch 1.35 According to Flannigan, the difference between wider fiduciary breach and relational undue influencelies merely in the particular mechanism of the abuse......
  • A TALE OF THE TIAHS AND THE FLEXIBILITY OF EQUITY:
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 1995, December 1995
    • 1 December 1995
    ...below under “proprietary estoppel”. 30 ER Ives Investment Ltd. v High [1967] Ch 194; Binions v Evans[1972] Ch 359. 31 [1972] Ch 359. 32 [1989] 1 Ch 1. 33 See “knowing assistance” below. 34 Along these lines it could then be further argued that the original vendor’s lien still lay against th......
  • 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