Keech v Sandford

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date01 January 1726
Date01 January 1726
CourtHigh Court of Chancery
Hughes
and
Games

English Reports Citation: 25 E.R. 224

HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY

hughes v. games. By custom, with consent of the homage, new copies may be granted ; Q. whether good custom without. In this case it was admitted, that a lord by custom may make new grants of part of the manor to hold by copy ; and a case was cited to that purpose. Lord Chancellor. In the case cited such grants were made with consent of the homage; the question here is, whether there be a custom to do it without the homage, and that must go to law; and then it will be by them considered, how far a custom to make such grants, without the homage, be a good custom, It was said, Lord Chief Justice Pemberton had a copy in this manor.

To continue reading

Request your trial
80 cases
  • Hartecon JV Sdn Bhd v Hartela Contractors Ltd
    • Malaysia
    • Court of Appeal (Malaysia)
    • Invalid date
  • O'Donnell v Shanahan
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 22 July 2009
    ...by directors in breach of the rule derives from the strict rule affecting trustees, the leading case in the latter field being Keech v. Sandford Sel. Cas. Ch. 61. In that case it had been impossible for the trustee to obtain a renewal of the trust's lease for the beneficiary, but the truste......
  • Newacres Sdn Bhd; Sri Alam Sdn Bhd
    • Malaysia
    • High Court (Malaysia)
    • 1 January 1995
  • Wicks v Bennett
    • Australia
    • High Court
    • Invalid date
  • Request a trial to view additional results
7 books & journal articles
  • Change of position and restitution for wrongs: 'ne'er the twain shall meet'?
    • Australia
    • Melbourne University Law Review Vol. 33 No. 1, April 2009
    • 1 April 2009
    ...2002), above n 6, 525. (170) Kuwait Airways [2002] 2 AC 883, 1093. (171) See Palmer, above n 46, 78. (172) See, eg, Keech v Sandford (1726) Sel Cas T King 61; 25 ER (173) P D Finn, 'The Fiduciary Principle' in T G Youdan (ed), Equity, Fiduciaries and Trusts (1989) 1, 4. (174) Chan v Zachari......
  • Fiduciary Conduct - A Tailored Application Lord Upjohn's Dissent in Boardman v Phipps [1967] 2 AC 46
    • United Kingdom
    • Wildy Simmonds & Hill Dissenting Judgments in the Law Part III - Equity and Property Law
    • 28 August 2018
    ...Pragmatism: directors’ duties and post-resignation conflicts of duty’, (2008) 1 Journal of Business Law 83, at p 84. 11 Keech v Sandford (1726) 25 ER 223 at 224, per Lord Chancellor King. 12 Lowry, J and Edmunds, R, ‘The Corporate Opportunity Doctrine: The Shifting Boundaries of the Duty an......
  • FAMILY FIDUCIARIES IN THE PROTECTIVE JURISDICTION.
    • Australia
    • Melbourne University Law Review Vol. 44 No. 1, August 2020
    • 1 August 2020
    ...Gummow, 'The 2017 Winterton Lecture: Sir Owen Dixon Today' (2018) 43(1) University of Western Australia Law Review 30, 34. (44) (1726) Sel Cas T King 61; 25 ER 223 ('Keech v (45) Ibid 223. (46) Ibid. (47) Ibid. See Matthew Conaglen, Fiduciary Loyalty: Protecting the Due Performance of Non-F......
  • RECONCEPTUALISING FIDUCIARY REGULATION IN ACTUAL CONFLICTS.
    • Australia
    • Melbourne University Law Review Vol. 45 No. 1, August 2021
    • 1 August 2021
    ...(9) See, eg, Regal (Hastings) Ltd v Gulliver [1967] 2 AC 134, 145 (Lord Russell) ('Regal (Hastings)'), discussing Keech v Sandford (1726) Sel Cas T King 61; 25 ER 223 (10) See, eg, Nocton v Lord Ashburton [1914] AC 932, 958 (Viscount Haldane LC) ('Nocton'). As Justice James Edelman explains......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT