Duck v Mayeu
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Date | 1892 |
| Year | 1892 |
| 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
48 cases
-
ACC Bank Plc v Malocco
...LAW OF CONTRACT 9ED 527 CUTLER V MCPHAIL 1962 2 QB 292 CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 1961 S17(1) MURPHY V J DONOHOE LTD 1993 IR 527 DUCK V MAYEU 1892 2 QB 511 CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 1961 S17(2) CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 1961 S35(1)(h) KERR ON CIVIL LIABILITY ACTS 1961–1964 39 WILLIAMS JOINT TORTS & CONTRIBU......
-
Murphy v J. Donohoe Ltd
...LIABILITY ACT 1961 S16(2) CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 1961 S35(1)(h) CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 1961 S22 MERRYWEATHER V NIXAN 101 ER 1337 DUCK V MAYEU 1892 2 QB 511 CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 1961 S17(1) CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 1961 S17(2) CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 1961 S16(3) CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 1961 S35 Synopsis: ACTIO......
-
Gladman Commercial Properties v 1.) Fisher Hargreaves Proctor and Others
...cause of action intact, so that all joint tortfeasors outside the benefit of the covenant remained vulnerable to further proceedings: see Duck v Mayeu [1892] 2 QB 24 In the Watts case, this court recognised an additional exception, namely where the agreement for the release of one (or more......
-
Bryanston Finance Ltd v de Vries
...I do not think that it should depend on whether the sum was paid under a covenant not to sue or a release, such as was discussed in Duck v. Mayeu (1892) 2 Q. B. 511; and Cutler v. McPhail (1962) 2 W. L. R. 1135. That is an arid and technical distinction without any merits. It is a trap into......
Request a trial to view additional results