Fishmongers' Company v East India Company
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 18 March 1752 |
| Date | 18 March 1752 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 21 E.R. 232
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
Fishmongers' Company
and
East India Company
Mews' Dig. Easements and Prescription, C, 2, c, iii. See Soltau v. Du Held, 1851, 2 Sim. N. S. 149; Jackson v. Duke of Newcastle, 1864, 10 L. T. 635; 10 Jur. N. S. 688.
232 fishmongers' company v. east india company dickens, fishmongers' company v. east india company. 18 March 1752. Application for an injunction to restrain building, so as to stop up lights, not being ancient lights, refused. The plaintiffs moved the Court this day, that the brick wall built by the defendants close to the wall of the yard or terrace belonging to the plaintiffs' house in Fenchurch Street, so far as the same obstructed, [164] darkened, or obscured the plaintiffs' ancient...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart 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
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
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
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
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
Start Your Free Trial
2 cases
-
Hunter v Canary Wharf Ltd
...enjoyment of his land. The building may spoil his neighbour's view (see Attorney-General v. Doughty (1752) 2 Ves. Sen. 453, and Fishmongers' Co. v. East India Co. (1752) 1 Dick 163); in the absence of an easement, it may restrict the flow of air onto his neighbour's land ( Bland v. Mosely (......
-
Hunter v London Docklands Development Corporation
... ... reception of television broadcasts at their homes in East London. The interference is said to have been caused by ... 20 In Fishmongers' Company v East India Company (1752) 1 Dick 163 , Lord ... ...