D'Almaida Aruajo (J.) Ltda. v Sir Fredk. Becker & Company Ltd

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Date1953
CourtQueen'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
14 cases
  • Choy Ching Wan @ Chua Cheng Wan v Land Development Specialist Sdn Bhd
    • Malaysia
    • High Court (Malaysia)
    • 1 Enero 2007
  • Centre Reinsurance International Company and Another v Curzon Insurance Ltd
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 21 Diciembre 2005
    ...to be decided exclusively in accordance with English law as the lex fori. 48 In J D'Almeida Araujo Lda v Sir Frederick Becker & Co Ltd [1953] 2 QB 329, Pilcher J held that in a claim for damages for breach of contract, issues of remoteness of damage were issues of substantive law to be gove......
  • Law v National Greyhound Racing Club Ltd
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 29 Julio 1983
    ...tribunals provided for by the BBC". 14 He then referred to what Denning L.J. had said in Lee v. Showmen's Guild of Great Britain [1953] 2 QB 329 at page 346 and to Lord Parker C.J.'s judgment in Reg. v. Criminal Injuries Compensation Board ( supra). He continued as follows: "Notwithstanding......
  • Boys v Chaplin
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 6 Diciembre 1967
    ...assessment of damages he agrees is a matter for the lex fori. He relies by analogy on the case of D'Almeida v. Becker & Co. Ltd. (1953) 2 Queen's Bench, p. 329, a case of contract, where Mr Justice Pilcher held that the question of remoteness of damages must be determined by the proper law ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Case Note
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 2011, December 2011
    • 1 Diciembre 2011
    ...SLR 367. 25 See Goh Suan Hee v Teo Cher Teck [2010] 1 SLR 367 at [16]-[18], citing J D‘Almeida Araujo LDA v Sir Frederick Becker & Co Ld [1953] 2 QB 329; Chaplin v Boys [1971] AC 356; and Harding v Wealands [2005] 1 WLR 1539. 26 [2000] HCA 36. 27 Goh Suan Hee v Teo Cher Teck [2010] 1 SLR 36......

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