Conquer v Boot
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 1928 |
| Date | 1928 |
| Year | 1928 |
| Court | King's Bench 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
71 cases
-
Republic of India and Another v India Steamship Company Ltd (Indian Endurance and Indian Grace)
...event possible in a contractual context, where proof of damage is not necessary to establish the cause of action. Here, as is shown by Conquer v. Boot [1928] 2 K.B. 336, it is necessary to identify the relevant breach of contract; and if it transpires that the cause of action in the first ......
- Asia Commercial Finance (M) Bhd v Kawal Teliti Sdn Bhd
- Chong Kew v Leow Lay
-
Brigita Morina v Catherine Mairead McAleavey
...does not challenge the outcome, he may not bring a second action on the same cause of action, for example to recover further damages: see Conquer v Boot [1928] 2 KB 336. Third, there is the doctrine of merger, which treats a cause of action as extinguished once judgment has been given on i......
Request a trial to view additional results
3 books & journal articles
-
RE-EXAMINING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MUTUAL PROMISES IN CONTRACT LAW.
...cases cited at n 182 above, see, eg, Forman & Co Pty Ltd v The Ship 'Liddesdale' [1900] AC 190, 205 (Lord Hobhouse); Conquer v Boot [1928] 2 KB 336, 344 (Talbot J); Parkinson v Lord [1925] VLR 22, 26 (Schutt J); Ettridge v Vermin Board of the District of MuratBay[1928] SASR 124, 130 (Na......
-
Litigation
...from attempting to re-litigate an issue in a foreign court: Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Co SAL [2008] BLR 391. 1378 [1928] 2 KB 336. 1379 [1928] 2 KB 336 at 346. he doctrine in Conquer v Boot has been described as “draconian”: Purser & Co (Hillingdon) Ltd v Jackson [1976]......
-
THE APPLICATION OF THE HENDERSON V HENDERSON RULE IN INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION
...UKSC 46; [2014] AC 160. 66[2002] 2 AC 1. 67Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd v Zodiac Seats UK Ltd[2013] UKSC 46; [2014] AC 160 at [17]. 68[1928] 2 KB 336. This case stands for the proposition that where a claimant succeeds in a first action and does not challenge the outcome, he may not bring a ......