Browne v Flower
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Date | 1911 |
| Court | Chancery Division |
-
- 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
53 cases
-
British Leyland Motor Corporation Ltd v Armstrong Patents Company Ltd
...of enjoying it with the other" per Bowen L.J. in Birmingham, Dudley and District Banking Co. v. Ross (1888) 38 Ch. D. 295 at 313. 104In Browne v. Flower [1911] 1 Ch. 219, 225 Parker 3. said that: "… The implications usually explained by the maxim that no one can derogate from his own grant......
-
William Old International Ltd v Arya
...negative in character. There are however limits to this doctrine as Parker J demonstrated in his analysis of the law as it then stood in Brown v. Flower [1911] 1 Ch 219 at 225–227. Having recognised that the doctrine permitted obligations to be implied that were analogous to easements in ci......
- Lyme Valley Squash Club Ltd v Newcastle under Lyme Borough Council
-
S Franses Ltd v The Cavendish Hotel (London) Ltd
...act or omission has caused the demised premises to become unfit or substantially less fit than the purpose for which they were let — see Brown v. Flower (1911) 1 Ch 219 at 225, as per Parker J., and also Aldin v. Latimer Clark Muirhead & Company (1894) 2 Ch 437. … 9. The circumstances as th......
Request a trial to view additional results
1 firm's commentaries
-
Q&A: Neighbours, Noise And Nuisance
...from Harassment Act 1997, which is seen by some as being inadequate for the purposes of protecting one's privacy. Browne v Flower [1911] 1 Ch 219 decided that the right not to be overlooked is not a facet of ownership of Fearn and others v Trustees of the Tate Gallery [2019] EWHC 246 (Ch); ......
1 books & journal articles
-
Legal protection from modern surveillance technology
...33-44; see also (1995) Cmnd. 2918: 'Government's Response to the Manorial Heritage Select Committee' at para 3.26. 87 BROWNE v Flower [1911]Ch219. 88 Ibid. 89 Other possible defences include innocent infringement and consent. We envisage a public interest arising in circumstances involving ......