Bilbie v Lumley
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Date | 1802 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
-
- 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
28 cases
-
Kleinwort Benson Ltd v Lincoln City Council
...41 How the rule became established: The origin of the rule is, as is very well known, the decision of the Court of King's Bench in Bilbie v. Lumley (1802) 2 East 469. There an underwriter paid a claim under a policy which he was entitled in law to repudiate for non-disclosure. Although he ......
-
Friends' Provident Life Office (A Firm) v Hillier Parker May & Rowden; Estates & General Plc and Others, third parties
...that, apart from the exceptional case of a payment made under compulsion, no restitutionary claim may be based on a mistake of law; see Bilbie v. Lumley [1802] 2 East 469; Woolwich Building Society v. IRC [1993] AC 70, HL, per Lords Keith and Goff at 154C-D and 164D-F respectively; see also......
-
BP Plc v AON Ltd and Aon Risk Services of Texas Inc.
...under mutual or common mistake of law can be treated as void or voidable: see Chitty on Contracts, 29 Edn para 5–043. The decision that Bilbie v. Lumley (1802) 2 East 469 should be overruled suggests that mistake of law could be a basis for avoiding a contract or treating it as void. Howeve......
-
R v Commissioners of Inland Revenue ex parte Woolwich Equitable Building Society
...ICR 419 BP Exploration Co (Libya) Ltd v Hunt (No.2) ELR[1983] 2 AC 352 Barton v Armstrong ELR[1976] AC 104 Bilbie v Lumley ENRENR(1802) 2 East 469; 102 ER 448 Blackpool and Fleetwood Tramroad Co v Bispham with Norbreck UDCELR[1910] 1 KB 592 Brocklebank (T & J) Ltd v The King ELR[1924] 1 KB ......
Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
-
Change of position and restitution for wrongs: 'ne'er the twain shall meet'?
...enrichment, was typically actionable only if the mistake was one of fact and not simply a mistake of law: see, eg, Bilbie v Lumley (1802) 2 East 469; 102 ER 448. This restriction was abolished in Australia by David Securities (1992) 175 CLR 353, 385 (Mason CJ, Deane, Toohey, Gaudron and McH......