Coghlan v Cumberland
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Date | 1898 |
| Year | 1898 |
| Court | Court of Appeal |
-
- 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
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
133 cases
-
Attorney General Appellant v Kenny D. Anthony Respondent [ECSC]
...aside and this Court is in as good a position as the trial judge to evaluate the Minister's evidence and draw its own inferences. Coghlan v Cumberland [1898] 1 Ch. 704 , Watt (or Thomas) v Thomas [1947] AC 484 applied and Golfview Development Ltd v St. Kitts Development Corporation and M......
- Anamaly @ Annamalai a/l Mayivin v Lim Ah Leak
- Mohd Yusof Mohd Rakim v Shanta a/p Periasamy
- CGU Insurance Berhad v Asean Security Paper Mills Sdn Bhd
Get Started for Free
2 books & journal articles
-
BOARD OF CUSTOMS & EXCISE V. BARAU
...Tramways Co. Ltd. (1919) S.C. (HL) 35. 30 39.Powell v. Streatham Manor Nursing Home (1935) A.C. 243, 250. 40. Coghlan v. Cumberland (1898) 1 Ch. 704, 705. 41.Montgomerie & Co. v. Wallace - James (1904) A.C. 73, 75. 42. Usen Friday Ekpo v. The State (1982) 6 S.C. 22. 43.Board of Customs v. O......
-
THE UNSTABLE PROVINCE OF JURY FACT-FINDING: EVIDENCE EXCLUSION, PROBATIVE VALUE AND JUDICIAL RESTRAINT AFTER IMM V. THE QUEEN.
...in Fox v Percy (2003) 214 CLR 118, 124-5 [20]-[22]. (130) Dearman v Dearman (1908) 7 CLR 549, 561 (Isaacs J). (131) Coghlan v Cumberland [1898] 1 Ch 704, 705; Justice Virginia Bell, 'Appellate Review of the Facts' (2014) 39 Australian Bar Review 132, (132) CSR (n 110) 7 [17] (Kirby J). See ......