Bainbridge v Smith

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
CourtCourt of Appeal
Date1888
Year1888

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
7 cases
  • British Murac Syndicate v Alperton Rubber Company
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • Invalid date
    ... ... Bainbridge v. Smith ( 1889 ) 41 Ch. D. 462 distinguished ... WITNESS ACTION ... The defendant company was incorporated under the Companies ... ...
  • Coubrough v James Panton & Company Ltd
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 1 January 1965
    ...Hayes v. Bristol Plant Hire Ltd.UNK [1957] 1 All E.R. 685 considered. Harben v. PhillipsELR 23 Ch.D. 14 and Bainbridge v. SmithELR 41 Ch.D. 462 distinguished. Coubrough v. James Panton & Co. Ltd. ARCHIBALD MURDOCK COUBROUGH Plaintiff and JAMES PANTON & COMPANY LIMITED, JOHN BROOKS, WILLIAM ......
  • Boschoek Proprietary Company Ltd v Fuke
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • Invalid date
    ... ... liquidator of the H. company” with a holding of 500 shares:— ... Held , that he was not qualified to be a director ... Bainbridge v. Smith , ( 1889 ) 41 Ch. D. 462 , 474, and Sutton v. English and Colonial Produce Co. , [ 1902 ] 2 Ch. 502 , applied ... Apart from ... ...
  • Oxford Legal Group Ltd v Sibbasbridge Services Plc
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 18 April 2008
    ... ... Mr Alexander Hill-Smith (instructed by BrookStreet des Roches LLP, 1 Des Roches Square, Witan Way, Witney, Oxfordshire, OX28 45LF) for the Appellant ... Mr Robin ... Phillips (1883) 23 Ch.D. 14 and Bainbridge v. Smith (1889) 41 Ch.D. 462 ... Each case, however, must depend on its special facts.” ... 31 As I have said, ... ...
  • Get Started for Free