Hobbs v Hobbs and Cousens
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Date | 1959 |
| Court | Probate, Divorce and Admiralty Division |
-
- 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
22 cases
-
JP Morgan Multi-Strategy Fund LP v Macro Fund Ltd
...Peat Properties Ltd. v. Fitzroy Robinson Partnership, [1987] 1 W.L.R. 1027; [1987] 2 All E.R. 716, referred to. (22) Hobbs v. Hobbs, [1960] P. 112; [1959] 3 All E.R. 827, dicta of Stevenson J. applied. (23) Hughes v. BiddulphENR(1827), 4 Russ. 190; 38 E.R. 777, referred to. (24) Istil Group......
-
Lee Victor Addlesee (and the others listed in the Schedule annexed to the Amended Claim Form) v Dentons Europe LLP
...Lindley MR in Calcraft v Guest [1898] 1 QB 759, 761) “privilege attaches for all time and in all circumstances” (Stevenson J in Hobbs v Hobbs [1960] P 112, 116–117) 9 As Lord Taylor put it later in his speech: “… once any exception to the general rule is allowed, the client's confidence i......
-
JSC BTA Bank (Claimant) Mukhtar Ablyazov and Others (Defendants) Mukhtar Ablyazov and Others (Respondents)
...a clean breast of it" to the lawyer: see eg Anderson v Bank of British Columbia (1876) 2 Ch D 644, 649 per Sir George Jessel MR; Hobbs v Hobbs and Cousins [1960] P 112, 116–7 per Stevenson J. As Mr Béar pointed out, it is the potential "chilling effect" of any uncertainty over whether such......
-
R v Derby Magistrates' Court, ex parte B
...I do not mean to say that privilege cannot be waived …" 55I may end with two more recent affirmations of the general principle. In Hobbs v. Hobbs [1960] P. 112, 116-117, Stevenson J. said: "Privilege has a sound basis in common sense. It exists for the purpose of ensuring that there shall ......
Request a trial to view additional results
5 books & journal articles
-
Table of Cases
...v Ashrif 1988 SLT 567 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168HMA v Ward 1993 SCCR 595 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161Hobbs v Hobbs and Cousens [1960] P 112 . . . 323Hodgkinson v Simms (1998) 33 BCLR (2d)129, CA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52, 53Holland v HM Advocate [20......
-
Litigation Privilege: Transient or Timeless? Blank v Canada (Minister of Justice)
...in Blank [2006] 2 SCR 319 at [36].13 [1898] 1 QB 759 at 761. See also Bullock vCorry (1878) 3 QBD 356 at 358–9.14 Hobbs vHobbs and Cousens [1960] P 112 at that never took place.15 Nor does it matter that the client has died.16 The privilegewill continue for the benefit of the client’s succe......
-
The Politics of Neutrality and Defence: Finnish Security Policy Since the Early 1970s
...1974, pp. 60- 1973, pp. 58-59. 61. 24 In a speech held in Moscow 24 November 11 J. K. Paasikivi, Paasikiuen linja (The Paa- 1960, cf. UPLA 1960, p. 112 and sikivi line) I, Puheita vuosilta 1944-1956, (1982), op. cit., p. 193. WSOY, Porvoo 1962, 25 p. 9. UPLA 1965, p. 123. The wording was no......
-
Facing Complexity: Democracy, Expertise and the Discovery Process
...and talks conventionally. It would be almost a contra-diction in terms for a politician to be a leader in the field of ideas (Hayek, 1960,p. 112).Interestingly, Hayek does envisage a role for philosophical expertise in developing andarticulating the case for liberty, the defining pr incip......
Request a trial to view additional results