Baylis v London (Bishop)

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Date1913
Year1913
CourtCourt of Appeal

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
14 cases
  • Dextra Bank and Trust Company Ltd v Bank of Jamaica
    • Jamaica
    • Court of Appeal (Jamaica)
    • 30 November 1999
    ...v Ecclesiastical Comrs for England and Wales [1880] 6QBD 234, and of the Court of Appeal in Baylis v Bishop of London [1913] 1 Ch 127 [1911 – 13] All E.R. Rep. 273. Instead, where change of position has been relied upon by the defendant, it has been usual to approach the problem as one of ......
  • Rover International Ltd v Cannon Film Sales Ltd
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 25 May 1988
    ...had not done so he was entitled to' be repaid." 87The authors also refer to the decision of this court in Baylis v. Bishop of London (1913) 1 Ch 127. That was a case where money had been paid under a mistake of fact and there was no question of estoppel—see per Hamilton L.J. at 141. This co......
  • Lipkin Gorman (A Firm)(Original Appellants and Cross-Respondents) v Karpnale Ltd (Formerly Playboy Club of London Ltd) (Original Respondents and Cross-Appellants)
    • United Kingdom
    • House of Lords
    • 6 June 1991
    ... ... Ecclesiastical Commissioners for England and Wales (1880) 6 Q.B.D. 234 , and of the Court of Appeal in Baylis v. Bishop of London [1913] 1 Ch. 127 ... Instead, where change of position has been relied upon by the defendant, it has been usual to approach the ... ...
  • Redland City Council v Kozik
    • Australia
    • High Court
    • 13 March 2024
    ...Sadler v Evans (1766) 4 Burr 1984 at 1986 [ 98 ER 34 at 35]. 263 Holt v Markham [1923] 1 KB 504 at 513. 264 Baylis v Bishop of London [1913] 1 Ch 127 at 265 (2001) 208 CLR 516. 266 (2001) 208 CLR 516 at 545–551[76]–[89]. 267 Including Myers v Hurley Motor Co (1927) 273 US 18 at 24; Atlant......
  • Get Started for Free
3 books & journal articles
  • Change of position and restitution for wrongs: 'ne'er the twain shall meet'?
    • Australia
    • Melbourne University Law Review Vol. 33 No. 1, April 2009
    • 1 April 2009
    ...(2004) 63 Cambridge Law Journal 276, 278-9; Edelman and Bant, above n 6, 319; Nolan, above n 73, 173. See also Baylis v Bishop of London [1913] 1 Ch 127, 140 (Hamilton (96) See Scottish Equitable plc v Derby [2001] 3 All ER 818, 832 (Simon Brown L J). (97) Lipkin Gorman [1991] 2 AC 548, 578......
  • The Rise and Fall of the Mistake of Law Rule
    • Ireland
    • Trinity College Law Review No. III-2000, January 2000
    • 1 January 2000
    ...an unenforceable oral 61 (1867) LR 2 UL 149. 62 Note difference between unjust enrichment and restitution ie action and remedy. 63 [1913] 1 Ch 127, at 140. 6 [1923] 1 KB 504, at 513. 65 (1995) 54 CJ 578. [1996] 1 IR 468; [1996] 2 ILRM 547 (SC). 67 Ibid., at 558. 68 (1987) 162 CLR 221. 2000]......
  • In Defence of Quasi‐Contract
    • United Kingdom
    • Wiley The Modern Law Review No. 75-1, January 2012
    • 1 January 2012
    ... ... show how considerations of fairness play a role in explaining why liability is imposed in 7 Baylis v Bishop of London [1913] 1 Ch 127, 140.For a contemporary version of exactly this fear see M ... ...