Holman v Johnson
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 05 July 1775 |
| Date | 05 July 1775 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 98 E.R. 1120
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH, CHANCERY AND COMMON PLEAS
Distinguished, Clugas v. Penaluna, 1791, 4 T. R. 468. Doubted, Bernard v. Reed, 1794, 1 Esq. 92. Distinguished, Waymell v. Reed, 1794, 5 T. R. 600; see Bristow v. De Sequeville, 1850, 5 Ex. 278. Referred to, Taylor v. Chester, 1869, L. R. 4 Q. B. 314; Scott v. Brown [1892], 2 Q. B. 728; In re Thomas [1894], 1 Q. B. 750; Burrows v. Rhodes [1899], 1 Q. B. 823; Gedge v. Royal Exchange Assurance Corporation [1900], 2 Q. B. 220.
rfbLJCfN'ET al' versus johnson, alias newland. Wednesday, July 5th, 1775. , Action lies for goods sold abroad, which are prohibited here, if the delivery of . them be complete abroad: tho' the vendor knows they are to be run into -. England. ;. 3 1. Ic/t.rp. [Distinguished, Clugas \.Penalwna, 1791, 4 T. R. 468. Doubted, Bernard v. Seed, K.B.ti794 1 Esp. 92. Distinguished, Waymell v. Reed, 1794, 5 T. R. 600 ; see Bristmu v. i# /6'-?£e Sequeville, 1850, 5 Ex. 278. Referred to, Taylor v. Chester, 1869, L. R. 4 Q. B. 314; Scott v. Brown [1892], 2 Q. B. 728; In re Thomas [1894], 1 Q. B. 750; Burrows v. Shades [18991 1 Q. B. 823 ; Gedge v. Royal Exchange Assurance Gorpm-a- titm [1900], 2 Q. B. 220.] _ Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered : plea non assumpsit and verdict for the plaintiff. Upon a rule to shew cause why a new trial should not be granted, Lord Mansfield reported the case, which was shortly this : the plaintiff who was resident at, and an inhabitant of, Dunkirk, together with his [342] partner, a native of that place, sold and delivered a quantity of tea, for the price of which the action was brought, to the order of the defendant, knowing it was intended to be smuggled by him into England : they had, however, no concern in the smuggling scheme itself, but merely sold this tea to him, as they would have done to any other person in the common and ordinary course of their trade. Mr. Mansfield, in support of the rule, insisted, that the contract for the sale of this tea being founded upon an intention to make an illicit use of it, which intention and purpose was with the privity and knowledge of the plaintiff, he was not entitled to the assistance of the laws of this country to recover the value of it. He cited Huberus 2 vol. 538, 539, and Robinson v. Bland,* to shew that the contract must be judged of by the laws of this country, and consequently that an action for the price of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Anderson v Cooke
...C.C. 145. Henwood v. Municipal Tramways Trust (S.A.) (1938) 60 C.L.R. 438; (1938) A.L.R. 312; (1938) 12 A.L.J. 101. Holman v. Johnson (1775) 1 Cowp. 341. Jackson v. Harrison (1978) 138 C.L.R. 438; (1978) 52 A.L.J.R. 474; (1978) 19 A.L.R. 129; (1978) 52 A.L.J. 703. Jaensch v. Coffey (1984) 1......
-
Regazzoni v K. C. Sethia (1944) Ltd
...but in the latter part his language is more comprehensive and clearly refers to the cases that I have cited, and particularly also to Holman v. Johnson, 1 Cowper 34, and the observation of Lord Mansfield often repeated and often criticised: "No country ever takes notice of the revenue laws ......
-
Valgardson v Chestnut
...Servs. PTE Ltd., [2003] I.C.R. 766; [2003] P.I.Q.R. P17; [2002] EWCA Civ 1821, distinguished. (5) Holman v. Johnson (alias Newland)ENR(1775), 1 Cowp. 341; 98 E.R. 1120; [1775–1802] All E.R. Rep. 98, distinguished. (6) Lim Chin Aik v. R., [1963] A.C. 160; [1963] 1 All E.R. 223; (1962), 106 S......
- ABDA Airfreight Sdn Bhd v Sistem Penerbangan Malaysia Bhd
-
Adventures In Cross-Border Tax Collection: Revenue Rule vs. Cum-Ex Litigation
...of academic writing on the subject and as the foremost authority on private international law. 4 Holman v. Johnson (1775) 1 Cowp 341, 343; 98 E.R. 1120, 1122. 5 James v. Catherwood (1823) 3 Dow & Ry KB 190, 191. 6 King of the Hellenes v. Brostron (1923) 16 LI. L.Rep. 190, 193. 7 In re Visse......
-
Place your bets: contract, restitution and illegality
...the claim: “No court will lend its aid to a man who founds his case upon an immoral or an illegal act” (Lord Mansfield Holman v Johnson (1775) 1 Cowp 341). However, the exact degree and nature of illegality which is required under English law to defeat such a claim has never been Money paid......
-
Illegality No Bar To Recovery
...which bars the claimant if he relies on the illegality in order to bring the claim. The judgment also suggests that Holman v Johnson [1775] 1 Cowp 341, where Lord Mansfield said "no court will lend its aid to a man who founds his cause of action upon an immoral or illegal act", will not be ......
-
Access to Justice for Migrant Workers
...in the State or any other part of the Common Travel Area for a continuous period of 2 years ending on that date.” 34 Holman v Johnson [1775] 1 Cowp 341. See the discussion in Treitel supra note 19, Cheshire & Fifoot supra note 19. 35 Forshaw “Illegally Formed Contracts of Employment and Equ......
-
CONTRACTUAL ILLEGALITY AND CONFLICT OF LAWS
...and Lord Keith of Kinkel held the view that the claimant who sought to recover his property must come to equity with clean hands. 290 (1775) 1 Cowp. 341. 291 [1993] 3 W.L.R. 126 at 132H. 292 [1994] 2 S.L.R. 431. 293 Ibid., at 436B per Lai Siu Chiu J.C. (as she then was). 294 See for instanc......
-
Contract formation
...he application of such statutes is discussed further in Chapter 19. 530 Holman v Johnson (1775) 1 Cowp 341 at 343, per Lord Mansield CJ [98 ER 1120 at 1121]. However, subject to limited exceptions a court will only ind a contract to be illegal where it is pleaded that the contract is illega......
-
Illegality
...law in this country, there the court says he has no right to be assisted. It is upon that ground the court goes; not 236 (1775) 1 Cowp 341, 98 ER 1120 (KB) [ Holman ]. Illegality 545 for the sake of the defendant, but because they will not lend their aid to such a plaintiff. So if the plain......