Browne v Dunn

JurisdictionUK Non-devolved
Judgment Date28 November 1893
Judgment citation (vLex)[1893] UKHL J1128-1
CourtHouse of Lords
Date28 November 1893
Browne
and
Dunn.

[1893] UKHL J1128-1

House of Lords

1

After hearing Counsel for the Appellant, as well on Friday last as yesterday and this day, upon the Petition and Appeal of James Loxham Browne, of Woodbine Cottage, The Vale, Hampstead, in the county of Middlesex, praying, That the matter of the Order set forth in the Schedule thereto, namely, an Order of Her Majesty's Court of Appeal, of the 7th of March 1893, might be reviewed before Her Majesty the Queen in Her Court of Parliament, and that the said 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 Cecil William Dunn (Defendant below), lodged in answer to the said Appeal; and Counsel appearing for the said Respondent, but not called on; and due consideration had of what was offered for the said Appellant:

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 Order of Her Majesty's Court of Appeal, of the 7th of March 1893, complained of in the said Appeal, be, and the same is hereby Affirmed, and that the said Petition and Appeal be, and the same is hereby dismissed this House: And it is further Ordered, That the Appellant do pay or cause to be paid to the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
973 cases
  • Malayan Banking Berhad v Tan Ke Xiou
    • Malaysia
    • High Court (Malaysia)
    • 1 January 2023
  • Spandeck Engineering (S) Pte Ltd v Defence Science & Technology Agency
    • Singapore
    • High Court (Singapore)
    • 12 December 2006
    ... ... ’s testimony (see his affidavit at [44]) that the plaintiff had under-priced the Contract was never challenged.   Based on the rule in Browne v Dunn (1893) 6 R 67 that “[a]ny matter upon which it is proposed to contradict the evidence-in-chief given by the witness must normally be put to ... ...
  • Granston v Attorney General
    • Jamaica
    • Supreme Court (Jamaica)
    • 10 August 2009
    ...so that he has an opportunity to respond to the assertion. I shall deal with this in more detail below under the heading of the rule in Browne v Dunn. 14 I accept that it is possible for a court or tribunal of fact to reject a witness' testimony on a point even if he is not confronted with ......
  • Britestone Pte Ltd v Smith & Associates Far East Ltd
    • Singapore
    • Court of Appeal (Singapore)
    • 28 September 2007
    ... ... ] 1 All ER (Comm) 789 (refd) Brown Noel Trading Pte Ltd v Donald & McArthy Pte Ltd [1996] 3 SLR (R) 760; [1997] 1 SLR 1 (refd) Browne v Dunn (1893) 6 R 67 (folld) C A & M E C Mcinally Nominees Pty Ltd v HTW Valuers (Brisbane) Pty Ltd (2001) 188 ALR 439 (refd) E & J ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6 firm's commentaries
  • Property & Projects - What's News in Property & Projects - 26 June 2012
    • Australia
    • Mondaq Australia
    • 1 July 2012
    ...– Reliability of Plaintiffs' witnesses – application of Jones v Dunkel [1959] HCA 8; (1959) 101 CLR 298 – application of Browne v Dunn (1893) 6 R 67 (HL) – Evidence Act 2008 (Vic) s 140. Joseph Street Pty Ltd & Ors v Tan & Ors [2012] VSCA 113 CONTRACT – Sale of land – Specific perfo......
  • Work Health & Safety - What's News - 5 August 2014
    • Australia
    • Mondaq Australia
    • 11 August 2014
    ...v Briginshaw [1938] HCA 34; (1938) 60 CLR 336 - whether the Tribunal erred in not requiring compliance with the rule in Browne v Dunn (1894) 6 R 67 - whether notice was given in any event satisfying the rule in Brown v Dunn and affording the appellant procedural fairness. EVIDENCE - rules o......
  • After 6 dead with 19 with Listeria Grower Cleared to Grow Rockmelons
    • United States
    • LexBlog United States
    • 6 April 2018
    ...size-medium wp-image-36836" src="https://lexblognetwork.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/r0_0_800_600_w1200_h678_fmax-300x225.jpg" alt width="300" height="225">I am just not sure about this. Should a grower responsible for illnesses and deaths and the devastation of the Australian ro......
  • California Regulatory Happenings - November 2018
    • United States
    • JD Supra United States
    • 15 November 2018
    ...also revised the schedule. A workshop is scheduled for 11/15/18. Successor to Existing Net Energy Metering Tariffs pursuant to PUC Section 2827.1 (R.14-07- 002) On 2/20/18 the ALJ issued a proposed decision adopting alternatives to promote distributed generation in disadvantaged communiti......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
11 books & journal articles
  • Subject Index
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage International Journal of Evidence & Proof, The No. 9-4, December 2005
    • 1 December 2005
    ...91British Coal Corp v Dennis Rye Ltd [1988] 3All ER 816, HL.............................................. 2 99Browne v Dunn (1893) 6 R 67, HL ............... 66Callanan v B [2004] QCA 478.. 296, 297, 298Campbell v Jones and Derrick (2002) 209NSR (2d) 81, 2002 NSCA 128 .........77, 103Campbe......
  • Litigation
    • United Kingdom
    • Construction Law. Volume III - Third Edition
    • 13 April 2020
    ...this principle is commonly known as the rule in Browne v Dunn , after the Scottish appeal to the House of Lords in Browne v Dunn (1893) 6 R 67; as to which see, eg, Seymour v Australian Broadcasting Commission (1990) 19 NSWLR 219; Leighton Contractors Pty Ltd v CE Heath Underwriting & Agenc......
  • Table of Cases
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage International Journal of Evidence & Proof, The No. 13-4, November 2009
    • 1 November 2009
    .... . . . . . .248Briscoe v LaHue 460 US 325 (1983), 1983 USLEXIS 146. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195Browne vDunn (1893) 6R 67 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153Buckley vThomas (1554) 1Plowden 118 . . . . . 52Cadbury Schweppes Pt Ltd v Amcor Ltd [2008]FCA 88. . . . . .......
  • Privacy and private law: the dilemma of justification.
    • Canada
    • McGill Law Journal Vol. 55 No. 2, July 2010
    • 1 July 2010
    ...(1976), 1 A.R. 47, 73 D.L.R. (3d) 62 (C.A.) (arguably extending the law of nuisance to capture privacy interests); Roth v. Roth (1991), 40.R. (3d) 740, 9 C.C.L.T. (2d) 141 (Ct. J. (Gen. Div.)) (recognizing the possibility that invasion of privacy might be actionable in the context of harass......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 provisions
  • DC Register Vol 62, No 41, October 2, 2015 Pages 012926 to 013174
    • United States
    • District of Columbia Register
    • Invalid date
    ...the permitted bonus density from 20% to 22%;  Remove all lot occupancy restrictions for all IZ projects in in all zones specified in § 2604.2 (R-5-E, CR,C-2-A/B/C, C-3-A, W-1/2/3 and  Permit an additional 10 feet of height as a matter of right for projects that include IZ units in all zon......
  • Arizona Administrative Register, Volume 25, Issue 13, March 29, 2019, p. 741-790
    • United States
    • Arizona Register
    • Invalid date
    ...of individuals who stay in a lodging unit. 4. Multi-use utensils and equipment provided in a lodging unit meet the requirements in R9-8-1304(4). R9-8-1312. Definitions Repealed A. “Approved” means acceptable to the B. “Department” means the Arizona Department of Health Services or a local h......

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