Bennett v Bennett
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 1952 |
| Year | 1952 |
| Date | 1952 |
| Court | Court of Appeal |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
50 cases
- Ling Pooi Ming; Ong Ah Mai
-
L v L
...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
...or "the main 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 ......
-
Ebanks v Ebanks
...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......
Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
-
Illegality
...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......