Hampton v Glamorgan County Council
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 09 November 1916 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [1916] UKHL J1109-1 |
| Court | House of Lords |
| Date | 09 November 1916 |
[1916] UKHL J1109-1
House of Lords
After hearing Counsel for the Appellant, as well on Tuesday last as this day, upon the Petition and Appeal of Reginald Moore Hampton, trading as Hampton and Company, of 18 City Road, in the City of Cardiff, praying, that the matter of the Order set forth in the Schedule thereto, namely, an Order of His Majesty's Court of Appeal, of the 22d of March 1915, might be reviewed before His Majesty the King in His Court of Parliament, and that the said Order might be reversed, varied, or altered, or that the Petitioner might have such other relief in the premises as to His Majesty the King in His Court of Parliament might seem meet; as also upon the printed Case of the Glamorgan County Council, lodged in answer to the said Appeal; and Counsel appearing for the Respondents, but not being called on; and due consideration being had of what was offered for the said Appellant:
It is Ordered and Adjudged, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, in the Court of Parliament of His Majesty the King assembled, That the said Order of His Majesty's Court of Appeal, of the 22d day of March 1915, complained of in the said Appeal, be, and the same is hereby, Affirmed, and that the said Petition and Appeal be, and the same is hereby, dismissed this House: And it is further Ordered, That the Appellant do pay, or cause to be...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lumbers v W Cook Builders Pty Ltd ((in Liquidation))
...406. 5 (1987) 162 CLR 221; [1987] HCA 5. 6 (1987) 162 CLR 221 at 245. 7 cf Monks v Poynice Pty Ltd (1987) 8 NSWLR 662. 8 Hampton v Glamorgan County Council [1917] AC 13 9 See Restatement of the Law: Restitution and Unjust Enrichment, 3d, Tentative Draft No 3 (2004) at §29. 10 [1994] 1 W......
-
Costello and Another v MacDonald and Others
...and provides certainty, and so limits disputes and litigation. The following cases support its application to the present case. 24 In Hampton v Glamorgan [1916] AC 13 the appellant was a subcontractor who carried out work for a school built for the respondent pursuant to a lump sum contract......
-
Issa Nicholas [Grenada Ltd] Appellant v Electrotec Services Ltd Respondent [ECSC]
...but by the building owner or hisarchitect, once those terms fell within the sums provided in the main contract. Hampton v Glamorgan [1917] A.C. 13. 42 On 23rd January 1986 PCA issued a payment certificate signed by Mr. Hosein and addressed to the appellant, certifying the Contract Sum $8,50......
-
Oliver Davis Trading as Davis Engineering Appellant v [1] Rona Henry [2] Eric Henry Respondents [ECSC]
...in contract to the contractor even if both have been held liable to the third party in tort.' (my emphasis). 25 The case of Hampton v Glamorgan County Council1 cited by learned Queen 's Counsel for the appellant provides an interesting illustration of the principle. In that case a builder c......
-
Variations
...to perform the provisional sum work itself, or arrange for another contractor to perform that work: Hampton v Glamorgan County Council [1917] aC 13 at 19, per Earl Loreburn. Ultimately, however, the ability of the owner to do so depends upon the terms of the particular contract. 672 VarIaTI......
-
Building and Construction Law
...of Concrete Construction (Pty) Ltd v Keidan & Co (Pty) Ltd1955 (4) SA 315 and the English decision of Hampton v Glamorgan County Council[1917] AC 13. 5.15 The universality of the problem and the difficult decisions it often engenders are shown by the English decision of Crittall Manufacturi......