Bray v Ford

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
CourtHouse of Lords
Judgment Date18 December 1895
Judgment citation (vLex)[1895] UKHL J1218-1

[1895] UKHL J1218-1

House of Lords

Bray
and
Ford.
1

After hearing Counsel as well on Monday the 2nd as Tuesday the 3rd days of this instant December, upon the Petition and Appeal of George Bray, of Belmont, Headingley, near Leeds, in the county of York, Gas Lighting Engineer, praying, That the matter of the Judgment and Order set forth in the Schedule thereto, namely, a Judgment of the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court of Justice, of the 2nd of August 1894, and also an Order of Her Majesty's Court of Appeal, of the 10th of November 1894, might be reviewed before Her Majesty the Queen in Her Court of Parliament, and that the said Judgment and Order might be reversed, varied, or altered, or that the Petitioner might have such other relief in the premises as to Her Majesty the Queen in Her Court of Parliament might seem meet; as also upon the printed Case of John Rawlinson Ford, lodged in answer to the said Appeal; and due consideration had this day of what was offered on either side in this Cause:

2

It is Ordered and Adjudged, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, in the Court of Parliament of Her Majesty the Queen assembled, That the said Judgment and Order complained of in the said Appeal be, and the same are hereby, Reversed; and it is hereby Directed that a new Trial be had, the costs of the proceedings in both Courts below to abide the event of the new Trial; And it is further Ordered, That the Respondent do repay or cause to be repaid to the Appellant all such Damages and Costs as the said Appellant has already paid to him; and it is further Ordered, That the Respondent do pay to the Appellant the Costs...

To continue reading

Request your trial
166 cases
  • Cairns v Modi
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 31 October 2012
    ...The traditional approach to assessing damages in a libel action may perhaps conveniently be summed up in the words of Lord Herschell in Bray v Ford [1896] AC 44, 52 (which had been cited by Laws LJ in Purnell): “The damages cannot be measured by any standard known to the law; they must be ......
  • John P Greene and Others v Danny Coady and Others
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 4 February 2014
    ...2006 IEHC 173 EDGE & ORS v PENSIONS OMBUDSMAN & ANOR 2000 CH 602 2000 3 WLR 79 1999 4 AER 546 2000 ICR 748 1999 PENS LR 215 BRAY v FORD 1896 AC 44 MCGHEE & ORS SNELLS EQUITY 32ED 2010 PARA 7.018 MCGHEE & ORS SNELLS EQUITY 32ED 2010 PARA 7.038 DREXEL BURNHAM LAMBERT UK PENSION PLAN, IN RE 19......
  • FHR European Ventures LLP and Others v Mankarious and Others
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 5 September 2011
    ...So far as the general rule is concerned, it has been stated to be an 'an inflexible rule of a Court of Equity', see Bray v. Ford [1896] AC 44 at p.51 per Lord Herschell, a rule which applies not only to cases of actual conflict but also where the fiduciary's interest may possibly conflict w......
  • O'Donnell v Shanahan
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 22 July 2009
    ...a trustee must not place himself in a position where his duty and his interest may conflict. He referred to its expression in Bray v. Ford [1896] AC 44, at 51, to Lord Cranworth's speech in Aberdeen Railway v. Blaikie 1 Macq. 461, at 471 (adding the qualification as to the meaning of 'possi......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
3 firm's commentaries
  • Trustee-beneficiaries: Can They Have The Cake And Eat It Too?
    • United Kingdom
    • Mondaq UK
    • 19 August 2021
    ...prophylactic rule; it exists to discourage fiduciaries from preferring their own interests over those of their beneficiaries: Bray v Ford [1896] AC 44. Where trustees have acted in breach of this rule, their purported decision may be voidable at the instance of the prejudiced beneficiary (o......
  • Trustee-beneficiaries: Can They Have The Cake And Eat It Too?
    • United Kingdom
    • Mondaq UK
    • 19 August 2021
    ...prophylactic rule; it exists to discourage fiduciaries from preferring their own interests over those of their beneficiaries: Bray v Ford [1896] AC 44. Where trustees have acted in breach of this rule, their purported decision may be voidable at the instance of the prejudiced beneficiary (o......
  • For Love Nor Money?... A Guide To Trustee Fees, Expenses And Service Agreements
    • Bermuda
    • Mondaq Bermuda
    • 12 January 2016
    ...powers have been reserved or granted by the settlor. This is discussed later in the Guide. 2 The common law and equity. 3 Bray v Ford [1896] A.C. 44. 4 See Carver v Duncan [1985] A.C. 5 In an application of the principle in Saunders v Vautier (1841) 10 L.J. 354. Note that certain jurisdicti......
11 books & journal articles

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