Groom v Crocker
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Date | 1937 |
| 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
197 cases
-
Ross v Caunters
... ... 610H–611A , 626F ) ... Robertson v. Fleming ( 1861 ) 4 Macq. 167 , H.L.(Sc.) and Groom v. Crocker [ 1939 ] 1 K.B. 194 , C.A. not followed ... Donoghue v. Stevenson [ 1932 ] A.C. 562 , H.L.(Sc.); Hedley Byrne & Co. Ltd ... ...
-
Midland Bank Trust Company Ltd v Hett, Stubbs & Kemp
... [1976] Q.B. 801 , C.A. and dictum of Lord Salmon inArenson v. Arenson [1977] A.C. 405 , 434, H.L.(E.) applied. Groom v. Crocker [1939] 1 K.B. 194, C.A.;Clark v. Kirby-Smith [1964] Ch. 506 ;Bagot v. Stevens Scanlan & Co. Ltd. [1966] 1 Q.B. 197 andCook v. Swinfen [1967] 1 W.L.R. 457 , C......
-
Ramsook v Crossley
...the point received short shrift in the light of the judge's findings that Mrs Crossley had never been served. The court distinguished Groom v Crocker [1939] 1 KB 194 as a case where the proceedings had been served on the defendant. 8 Clause 15 of the insurance policy reads: “ REPRESENTATION......
- Loh Bee Tuan v Shing Yin Construction (Kota Kinabalu) Sdn Bhd and Others
Request a trial to view additional results
5 books & journal articles
-
The emergence of solicitors’ tortious liability and the award of damages
...been implemented byParliament long before, as it is not a complex issue.REFERENCES(1) Byles J in Fish v Kelly (1874) 17 CBNS 194.(2) [1938] 2 All ER 394, [1939] 1 KB 194.(3) [1976] QB 801, at 819.(4) [1978] 3 All ER 571, [1979] Ch 384.(5) [1980] Ch 297, [1979] 3 All ER 580.(6) Per Cardozo C......
-
Concurrent Duties
...Boorman vBrown (1844) 8 ER 1003 (HL); Godefroy vJay (1831) 131 ER 159 (KB); Grant vAustralian Knitting Mills [1936] AC 85 (PC).16 [1939] 1 KB 194 (CA).17 Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd vHeller & Partners Ltd [1964] AC 465 (HL).18 Their Lordships relied on the concept of ‘assumption of responsibility......
-
Legal Profession
...the circumstances makes it so clear an implication [that the solicitor himself] ought to have appreciated it. (See also Groom v Crocker[1939] 1 KB 194 at 222.) Incidentally, the requirement that the solicitor himself ought to have appreciated that an implied retainer has arisen contrasts sh......
-
APPORTIONMENT OF DAMAGES FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT
...Medley Byrne v Heller & Partners Ltd[1963] 2 All ER 575, notwithstanding an earlier English Court of Appeal decision in Groom v Crocker[1938] 2 All ER 394 that a client’s action against his solicitor arose in contract only. Lloyd LJ in the Court of Appeal case of Lee v Thompson[1989] EG 89,......
Request a trial to view additional results