Erichsen v Last

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
CourtCourt of Appeal
Year1881
Date1881

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
35 cases
  • Wilcock v Pinto & Company
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal
    • 20 February 1925
    ...several occasions, and there are three or four decisions to which I should like to refer. The first is the case of Erichsen v. Last(1) , reported in 8 Q.B.D., at page 414. It is not necessary that I should refer to the facts of that case; I only refer to a dictum of Lord Justice Brett on pa......
  • Stone v Commissioner of Taxation
    • Australia
    • Federal Court
    • Invalid date
  • Lee Yee Shing And Another v Commissioner Of Inland Revenue
    • Hong Kong
    • Court of Final Appeal (Hong Kong)
    • 31 January 2008
    ...all the circumstances involved in the activities claimed to be a trade. As Jessel MR said of the term “trade” in Erichsen v. Last (1881) 8 QBD 414 at 416 “ There is not, I think, any principle of law which lays down what carrying on trade is. There are a multitude of things which together m......
  • G.H (Trinidad) Ltd v The Board of Inland Revenue
    • Trinidad & Tobago
    • Tax Appeal Board (Trinidad and Tobago)
    • 14 March 1985
    ...1 T.T.T.C. 82. (2) Ronell v. F.C.T. 8 ATR 411. (3) Parkin v.Cattell 48 T.C. 462; [1971] TR 177. (4) Erichsen v. Last 4 T.C. 422; (1881–82) 8 Q.B.D. 414. (5) Smidth (EL.) Co. E. v. Greenwood (1922) 8 T.C. 196; [1922] A.C. 417; 38 T.L.R. 421. (6) Maclaine & Co. v. Eccott, (1924) 10 T.C. 111; ......
  • Get Started for Free