Keighley, Maxsted, and Company v Durant
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judgment Date | 20 May 1901 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [1901] UKHL J0520-3 |
| Court | House of Lords |
| Date | 20 May 1901 |
[1901] UKHL J0520-3
House of Lords
After hearing Counsel, as well on Monday the 11th as Tuesday the 12th, Thursday the 14th and Friday the 15th days of March last, upon the Petition and Appeal of Keighley, Maxsted, and Company, of the town and county of Kingston-upon-Hull, praying, That the matter of the Order set forth in the Schedule thereto, namely, an Order of Her Majesty's Court of Appeal, of the 2nd of March 1900, might he reviewed before Her Majesty the Queen in Her Court of Parliament, and that the said Order might he reversed and set aside, and that the Judgment directed to be entered by the Honourable Mr. Justice Day in favour of the Petitioners with costs might be restored, or that the Petitioners might have such other relief in the premises as to Her Majesty the Queen, in Her Court of Parliament, might seem meet; as also upon the printed case of Bryan Erskine Durant (carrying on business as Bryan Durant and Company), lodged in answer to the said Appeal; And due consideration being had this day of what was offered on either side in this Cause:
It is Ordered and Adjudged, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, in the Court of Parliament of His Majesty the King assembled, That the said Order of Her late Majesty's Court of Appeal, of the 2nd of March 1900, complained of in the said Appeal, be, and the same is hereby, Reversed; and that the Judgment of Mr. Justice Day, of the 1st of August 1899, be, and the same is hereby, Restored: And it is further Ordered, That the Respondent do pay, or cause to be paid, to the Appellants the costs incurred by them in the Courts...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Spiro v Lintern
-
(1) Nelista Rambally individually and as personally representative of the Estate of Hezekiah Rambally (2) Rudolph Rambally (3) Sieana Rambally Claimants v (1) Barbados Fire and General Insurance Company Ltd (2) Thomas Jean (3) Thomas M. Jean Insurance Brokerage Ltd Defendants [ECSC]
...The lack of clarity in the law was recognized by the House of Lords from as far back as 1901 in Keighley, Maxsted and Co.-vs-Durant [1901] 17 T.L.R, 527. The head note in this case reads that a contract made by a person in his own name, not purporting to act on behalf of a principal, but ha......
-
Gibbons v Doherty
... ... However, the company did not have the funds to complete the sale of the third lot, and, ... intention to assign where a person intended to act as another ( Keighley, Maxted and Co. v. Durant [1901] AC 240 ). As in Keighley , Mr ... ...
-
Magellan Spirit Aps v Vitol Sa "magellan Spirit"
...principle that "civil obligations are not to be created by or founded upon undisclosed intentions": Keighley Maxsted & Co v Durant [1901] AC 240, 247, per Lord Macnaghten. Nevertheless, the doctrine is firmly established. As long ago as 1872, Blackburn J said in Armstrong v Stokes (1871–72......
-
General Principles of Interpretation
...C Staughton, “How Do the Courts Interpret Commercial Contracts?” [1999] Cambridge LJ 303 at 304–6. 22 Keighley, Maxted & Co v Durant , [1901) AC 240 at 247 & 248 (HL); Law-Woman Management Corp v Peel (Regional Municipality) (1991), 2 OR (3d) 567 at 592–93 (Gen Div). 23 See Section B(3), be......
-
The liability of a commercial bank for fraudulent activities of its manager : the NBS bank cases & other related cases
...under 4 Goldblatt’s Wholesale (Pty) Ltd v Damalis 1953(3) SA 730. 5 Dreyer v Sonop Bpk 1951(2) SA; Keighly Maxstead & Co Ltd v Durant [1901] AC 240; Alli v De Lira 1973 (4) SA 635 (T); Legg & Co v Premier Tobacco Co 1926 AD 132, p.14. 6 Hely-Hutchinson v Brayhead Ltd & Another [1968] 1 QB 5......