Bennett v Bennett

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date1952
Date1952
Year1952
CourtCourt of Appeal
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
51 cases
  • Ling Pooi Ming; Ong Ah Mai
    • Malaysia
    • High Court (Malaysia)
    • 1 January 1984
  • L v L
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal
    • 23 October 1961
    ...that the jurisdiction of the court to award maintenance to a wife cannot be ousted by any private agreement between the parties; see Bennett v. Bennett (1952 volume 1 King's Bench Division, page 249) following Hyman v. Hyman. Such an agreement is unenforceable against the wife as being cont......
  • Marshall v N M Financial Management Ltd
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 13 March 1997
    ...consideration", or "the whole or substantially the whole consideration" for the promise: for the last formulation see Bennett v Bennett [1952] 1 KB 249 at p. 261 per Denning LJ. 25 I doubt that there is any real difference between these different formulations, so long as it is recognised (i......
  • Ebanks v Ebanks
    • Jamaica
    • Court of Appeal (Jamaica)
    • 5 April 1968
    ...L.J. applied. (2) Beattie v. Beattie, [1938] P. 99; [1938] 2 All E.R. 74, dicta of Merriman, P. applied. (3) Bennett v. Bennett, [1952] 1 K.B. 249; [1952] 1 All E.R. 413, dicta of Denning, L.J. applied. (4) Hamlyn & Co. v. Talisker Distillery, [1894] A.C. 202; [1891–4] All E.R. Rep. 849, di......
  • Get Started for Free
3 books & journal articles
  • Illegality
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books The Law of Contracts. Third Edition Vitiating Factors
    • 4 August 2020
    ...the Criminal 310 Amoco Australia Pty v Rocca Bros Motor Engineering Co , [1975] AC 561 (PC). 311 See, for example, Bennett v Bennett , [1952] 1 KB 249 (CA) (separation agreement in which the consideration f‌lowing from the wife was an unenforceable undertaking not to invoke the jurisdiction......
  • Statute-barred cohabitant claimants in Barbados
    • Barbados
    • Caribbean Law Review No. 2-1, June 1992
    • 1 June 1992
    ...the limitation period; 18 and where, as in 12 Simmonds v. Simmonds [1955] 2 All E.R. 481 at 492. 13 Ibid. See also Bennett v. Bennett [1952] 1 K.B. 249, where the delay arose from the fact that the registrar erroneously struck out the wife's application for maintenance for herself and the s......
  • Get Started for Free

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