Burton v Pinkerton
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Date | 1865 |
| Court | Exchequer |
-
- 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
13 cases
- Bailey v Bullock
- Baltic Shipping Company v Dillon
-
Farley v Skinner
...parents in law. Bray J held that damages for inconvenience and discomfort were recoverable. In doing so he followed Burton v Pinkerton (1867) LR 2 Exch 340 and Hobbs v London and South Western Railway. He said (at page 1170) that there was a real difference between what he described as 'mer......
-
Administrator, Natal v Edouard
...Jockie v Meyer 1945 AD 354; Hobbs v London and South Western Railway Co (1875) 10 QB 111 (which refers at 121 also to Burton v Pinkerton 1867 LR 2 Ex 340). As to academic support for the contention that damages for physical inconvenience may be recovered in contract, see Christie The Law of......
Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
-
WORKPLACE SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN SINGAPORE: THE LEGAL CHALLENGE
...(1824) 2 Bing 229, 130 ER 294; French v Brookes(1830) 6 Bing 354, 130 ER 1316; Lake v Campbell(1862) 5 LT 582; Burton v Pinkerton(1867) LR 2 Exch 340; Ross v Pender(1874) IR 352; Laverack v Woods Ltd[1966] 3 All ER 683 (CA); Middlefield v SAC Technology Ltd[1990] 1 WLR 1002. 174 McGregor on......