Attorney General v Edison Telephone Company of London

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date1880
Date1880
CourtExchequer Division
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
30 cases
  • Moses Bhagwan v Bernel G Chester Detective Inspector of Police
    • Guyana
    • Court of Appeal (Guyana)
    • Invalid date
  • British Broadcasting Corporation v Johns
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal
    • 5 March 1964
    ...inland telegrams, a privilege which was held to extend to telephonic communications when telephony was invented (see Attorney-General v. Edison Telephone Company); but this statutory method of dealing with a new activity by creating a monopoly in the executive government with exceptions whi......
  • R (Smeaton (on Behalf of The Society for The Protection of Unborn Children)) v Secretary of State for Health
    • United Kingdom
    • Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court)
    • 18 April 2002
    ...Ireland Ltd) v Open Door Counselling Ltd and Dublin Wellwoman Centre Ltd [1988] IR 593, Ir HC. A-G v Edison Telephone Co of London Ltd (1880) 6 QBD 244. A-G’s Reference (No 3 of 1994) [1998] AC 245, [1997] 3 All ER 936, [1997] 3 WLR 421, HL. Airedale NHS Trust v Bland[1994] 1 FCR 485, [1993......
  • General Dynamics United Kingdom Ltd v State of Libya
    • United Kingdom
    • Supreme Court
    • 25 June 2021
    ...will in appropriate circumstances be interpreted as including a claim form: compare Attorney General v Edison Telephone Co of London Ltd (1880) 6 QBD 244, where the Exchequer Division of the High Court (Pollock B and Stephen J) held that there was no difference between telephonic and telegr......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 firm's commentaries
5 books & journal articles
  • Table of Cases
    • United Kingdom
    • Wildy Simmonds & Hill How Judges Decide Cases: Reading, Writing and Analysing Judgments. 2nd Edition Contents
    • 29 August 2018
    ...126 Atlantic Star, The [1974] AC 436, [1973] 2 WLR 795, [1973] 2 All ER 175, HL 61 Attorney General v Edison Telephone Co of London Ltd (1880) 6 QBD 244, CA 129 Attorney-General v Guardian Newspapers (No 2) [1990] 1 AC 109, [1988] 2 WLR 805, [1988] 3 All ER 545, CA 137 B (Appeal: Lack of Re......
  • The Use of Language in Judgments
    • United Kingdom
    • Wildy Simmonds & Hill How Judges Decide Cases: Reading, Writing and Analysing Judgments. 2nd Edition Contents
    • 29 August 2018
    ...of Appeal, Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers MR cited the early illustration of Attorney General v Edison Telephone Co of London Ltd (1880) 6 QBD 244. The Telegraph Act 1869 (32 & 33 Vict c 73) gave the Postmaster-General an exclusive right of transmitting telegrams. Telegrams were defined a......
  • Table of cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Statutory Interpretation. Third Edition Preliminary Sections
    • 23 June 2016
    ...66 Attorney General v Edison Telephone Co of London (1880), 6 QBD 244 ..........121 Attorney-General v Prince Ernest Augustus of Hanover, [1957] AC 436 (HL) ......................................................................................161 Auer v Lionstone Holdings Inc, 2005 ABCA 78 ......
  • Original Meaning
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Statutory Interpretation. Third Edition Establishing First Impression Meaning
    • 23 June 2016
    ..., 2004 FCA 282. 18 A classic example of functional equivalence reasoning is found in Attorney General v Edison Telephone Co of London (1880), 6 QBD 244, in which provisions of UK’s Telegraph Act were applied to newly invented telephones. 19 Above note 4. STATUTORY INTERPRETATION 122 cannabi......
  • 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