Your World of Legal Intelligence
 United Kingdom | +44 (0) 20 7284 8080

Black & Decker Inc. v Flymo Ltd

Weekly Law Reports The Times Law Reports Cited authorities 1 Cited in 29 Precedent Map Related
Vincent
JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date21 November 1990
Date21 November 1990
CourtChancery Division
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
25 cases
  • JP Morgan Multi-Strategy Fund LP v Macro Fund Ltd
    • Cayman Islands
    • Grand Court (Cayman Islands)
    • 30 May 2003
    ...Eady, L.JJ. considered. (5) Berd v. LovelaceENR(1577), Cary 62; 21 E.R. 33, referred to. (6) Black & Decker Inc. v. Flymo Ltd., [1991] 1 W.L.R. 753; [1991] 3 All E.R. 158, dicta of Hoffmann J. distinguished. (7) Bolton v. Liverpool Corp.ENR(1833), 1 My. & K. 88; 39 E.R. 614, referred to. (8......
  • Barbara Lim Cheng Sim v Uptown Alliance (M) Sdn Bhd (No 2)
    • Malaysia
    • High Court (Malaysia)
    • 1 January 2014
  • ISTIL Group Inc. v Zahoor
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 14 February 2003
    ...Peat Properties Ltd v. Fitzroy Robinson Partnership [1987] 1 WLR 1027, 1044, per Slade LJ accepting argument to this effect. In Black & Decker Inc v. Flymo Ltd [1991] 1 WLR 753 Hoffmann J said that once a privileged document was disclosed the question was one of admissibility, and not privi......
  • Bruno Lachaux v Independent Print Ltd/ Evening Standard Ltd
    • United Kingdom
    • Queen's Bench Division
    • 18 December 2015
    ...Peat Properties Ltd v. Fitzroy Robinson Partnership [1987] 1 WLR 1027, 1044, per Slade LJ accepting argument to this effect. In Black & Decker Inc v. Flymo Ltd [1991] 1 WLR 753 Hoffmann J said that once a privileged document was disclosed the question was one of admissibility, and not pri......
    • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • Table of Cases
    • United Kingdom
    • International Journal of Evidence & Proof, The No. 13-4, November 2009
    • 1 November 2009
    ...[1987] 2SCR 398 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .93Bell vR [1985] FCA454 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251Black &Decker v Flymo[1991] 1 WLR753 . . . 337Blagojevic and Jokic (Case No. IT-0260-T)Decision on Prosecution’s Motion forAdmission of Expert Statements, 7November 2003. . . ......
  • ADMISSIBILITY, PRIVILEGE AND THE EXPUNGING OF EVIDENCE
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 1994, December 1994
    • 1 December 1994
    ...Disclosure in Civil Proceedings”(1991) 107 LQR 99. 26 As a general proposition, what Hoffmann J said it Black & Decker Inc v Flymo Ltd[1991] 3 All ER 158 at 159 is true: “It is not possible to assert a right to refuse to disclose in respect of a document which has already been disclosed. On......

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