Ingle v Farrand
Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
Year | 1927 |
Date | 1927 |
Court | King's Bench 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
6 cases
-
Karen Smith Derek Burrell v The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc
... ... legislation does not have retrospective effect unless that construction appears very clearly or arises by necessary and distinct implication ( Ingle v Farrand [1927] AC 417 at 428). If the legislation is intended to have some retrospective effect, it should not be given any greater ... ...
-
Ethel Pearse (Respondent v The Chief Adjudication Officer and Another (Appellants
... ... declaring in terms the purpose for which it is made, the court should if possible give an effective meaning to those limiting words: (compare Ingle v. Farrand [1927] A.C. 417 at page 423 per Viscount Cave L.C.). It is a well known principle that, unless there is good reason to the contrary, an ... ...
-
Sonia Williams of Castle Comfort Conrad Charles of Bath Estate Anita Joseph of Canefield, and Mervin Anthony of Kings Hill for and on behalf of themselves and on behalf of and as representing members of the Dominica Public Service Union who are Public Officers for declaratory and other relief Appellants v Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Dominica Respondent [ECSC]
...legitimate expectation. With respect to the issue of retroactivity, the learned judge held, correctly, on the authority ofIngle v Farrand [1927] A.C. 4175 and James v IRC [1977] 2 All E.R. 897,6 that the 2003 Act cannot be impeached for retroactivity because the clear provisions of the Act,......
-
Bata Shoe Company Guyana, Ltd et Al v Commissioner of Inland Revenue and Attorney General Diamond Liquors Ltd et Al v The Commissioner of Inland Revenue and Attorney General
... ... language of the legislation makes it clear that it shall have retrospective operation then that express intention must not be defeated — see Ingle v. Farrand [1927] A.C. 417 , at p. 428. If this results in hardship then it is for Parliament to provide relief. As Lord Atkinson said in Ingle v ... ...
Request a trial to view additional results