Hampstead & Suburban Properties Ltd v Diomedous

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date1968
Date1968
Year1968
CourtChancery Division
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
56 cases
  • Rajaram v Ganesh trading as Golden Harvest Trading Corp and Others
    • Singapore
    • High Court (Singapore)
    • 25 July 1994
  • Villa Cornucopia Ltd v Esther Developments Ltd
    • British Virgin Islands
    • Court of Appeal (British Virgin Islands)
    • 8 December 2023
    ...plc [1984] 1 All ER 225 considered; National Commercial Bank Jamaica Ltd v Olint Corpn Ltd. [2009] 1 WLR 1405 applied; Hampstead & Suburban Properties Ltd. v Diomedous [1969] 1 Ch. 248 considered; Digicel (Fiji) Ltd v Fiji Rugby Union and another [2017] 2 LRC 97 considered; Attorney Gene......
  • Peel Land and Property (Ports No. 3) Ltd v TS Sheerness Steel Ltd
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 1 August 2013
    ...for an interim injunction. 48 In fact there are two cases which are very much in point in that respect. They are Hampstead & Suburban Properties Limited v Diomedous [1969] 1 Ch 248 and Texaco Ltd v Mulberry Filling Station Ltd [1972] 1 WLR 814. 49 The first of these cases establishes that w......
  • FS v RS
    • United Kingdom
    • Family Court
    • 30 September 2020
    ...support by reference to authority.” But is the universal assumption correct? I leave the last word to Megarry J, who in Hampstead & Suburban Properties Ltd v Diomedous [1969] 1 Ch 248, 259, said with grim humour: “It may be that there is no direct authority on this point; certainly none ha......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • RESTRAINING A CALL ON A PERFORMANCE BOND: SHOULD ‘FRAUD OR UNCONSCIONABILITY’ BE THE NEW ORTHODOXY?
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 2000, December 2000
    • 1 December 2000
    ...is a clear breach of covenant (Doherty v Allman(1878) 3 App Cas 709, at 720, approved in Hampstead & Suburban Properties Ltd v Diomedous[1969] 1 Ch 248, at 259), or no arguable defence ( Official Custodian for Charities v Mackey[1985] Ch 168, at 187); (d) there is no dispute as to the facts......
  • Table of Cases
    • Canada
    • Irwin Books Archive The Law of Equitable Remedies. Second Edition
    • 18 June 2013
    ...(S.C.J.)........................................... 97 Hampstead & Suburban Properties Ltd. v. Diomedous (1968), [1969] 1 Ch. 248, [1968] 3 W.L.R. 990, [1968] 3 All E.R. 545 ................... 428 Hanen v. Cartwright, 2007 ABQB 184 ................................................................

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