John Glover port breve de Transg v John Andrew en que le Case fuit que le

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
CourtCourt of Common Pleas
Judgment Date01 January 1664
Date01 January 1664

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
97 cases
  • Fowler v Keegan Quarries Ltd
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 28 October 2016
    ... ... have leave to apply to the court to have the case relisted for hearing ... 10 ... 14 John Keegan, the managing director of the Respondent ... ...
  • Western Australian Planning Commission v Temwood Holdings Pty Ltd
    • Australia
    • High Court (Australia)
    • 9 December 2004
    ...That question is entirely distinct from the question in this case — whether the condition imposed on the subdivisions of the land on 17 May and 7 September 2000 had an extraneous object. In Lloyd v Robinson, this Court answered the question before it by finding that the imposition of the co......
  • Austral Pacific Group Ltd v Airservices Australia
    • Australia
    • High Court (Australia)
    • 3 August 2000
    ...Federal jurisdiction — Whether s 64 of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) operated — Whether s 79 of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) ‘picked up’ ss 6 and 7 of the LawReform Act 1995 (Q) — Whether ss 44 or 45 of the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 (Cth) ‘otherwise provided’ within th......
  • Re Norton Health Care Ltd (Irish patent nos. 1121375 and 1499278)
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 1 December 2005
    ... ... to such a course of action in which case we suggest that the position be explained to Mr ... ...
  • Get Started for Free