Hawkesley v May

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
CourtQueen's Bench Division
Year1955
Date1955

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
39 cases
  • Nielsen-Jones v Fedden
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • Invalid date
    ...of a note appearing in 84 Law Quarterly Review, p. 462, and also that, if they were correct, so far as I can see, section 36Hawkesley v. May [1956] 1 Q.B. 304 and In re Draper's Conveyance [1969] 1 Ch. 486 not followed. The following cases are referred to in the judgment: Bedson v. Bedson [......
  • David Chelliah v Monorail Malaysia Technology Sdn Bhd
    • Malaysia
    • High Court (Malaysia)
    • 1 January 2009
  • Shanmugam Nagaiah and Another v Sivakolunthu Kumarasamy
    • Singapore
    • High Court (Singapore)
    • 29 October 1985
    ...effect was immaterial. The learned Chief Justice therefore ordered that the partition decree be carried out.Havers J in Hawksley v May [1955] 3 All ER 353 was of the view that a unilateral declaration of intention to sever, if communicated to the other joint tenants, may be sufficient to ef......
  • Re Draper's Conveyance
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • Invalid date
    ...herself and the estate of the husband as tenants in common in equal shares. Dictum of Havers J. in Hawkesley v. May [1956] 1 Q.B. 304; [1955] 3 W.L.R. 569; [1955] 3 All E.R. 353 Bedson v. Bedson [1965] 2 Q.B. 666; [1965] 3 W.L.R. 891; [1965] 3 All E.R. 307, C.A. considered. The following ca......
  • Get Started for Free