Lee v Dangar

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Date1892
Year1892
CourtCourt of Appeal
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
10 cases
  • Murphy v GM
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 18 Octubre 2001
    ...ARTICLES TRADE ASSOCIATIONS V AG FOR CANADA 1931 AC 310 KENNY OUTLINES OF CRIMINAL LAW FRAILEY V CHARLTON 1920 1 KB 147 LEE V DANGAR 1892 2 QB 337 BAGGE V WHITEHEAD 1892 2 QB 355 OFFENCES AGAINST THE STATE (AMDT) ACT 1985 S2 OFFENCES AGAINST THE STATE ACT 1939 S22 HAUGHEY, RE 1971 IR 2......
  • Murphy v GM PB PC Ltd and GH
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 4 Junio 1999
    ...ART 38.5 CUSTOMS (TEMPORARY PROVISIONS) ACT 1945 S5(1)(a) CUSTOMS (TEMPORARY PROVISIONS) ACT 1945 S5(3) LEE V DANGAR GRANT & CO 1892 2 QB 337 BAGGE V WHITEHEAD 1892 2 QB 355 CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1994 S63 CLANCY V IRELAND 1988 IR 326 MCLOUGHLIN V TUITE 1989 IR 82 O'KEEFFE V FERRIS 1997 2......
  • Melling v O Mathghamhna
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 1 Enero 1963
    ...Before Maguire C.J. , Lavery , Kingsmill Moore , Ó Dálaigh ó dálaigh and Maguire JJ. (1) [1920] 1 K. B. 147. (2) [1939] I. R. 274. (3) [1892] 2 Q. B. 337. (4) [1892] 2 Q. B. 355. (1) [1944] N. I. 91. (2) 94 I. L. T. R. 161. (3) [1935] N. I. 211. (4) [1946] 1 K. B. 176. (5) [1930] I. R. 163.......
  • McLoughlin v Tuite
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 13 Junio 1989
    ...AG V SOUTHERN INDUSTRIAL TRUST 94 ILTR 161 CUSTOMS (CONSOLIDATION) ACT 1876 S186 BLACKSTONE COMMENTARIES V4 P5 LEE V DANGAR GRANT & CO 1892 2 QB 337 BAGGE V WHITEHEAD 1892 2 QB 355 INCOME TAX ACT 1967 S500(1) INCOME TAX ACT 1967 S500(2) INCOME TAX ACT 1967 S500(3) INCOME TAX ACT 1967 S504 F......
  • Get Started for Free
1 books & journal articles
  • The plea of accident in the criminal law
    • Barbados
    • Caribbean Law Review No. 11-2, December 2001
    • 1 Diciembre 2001
    ... ... 25, at p. 293. 47 Steinke v. Australian Provincial Assurance [1944] St. R. Qd. 7, 16, per Mansfield, J. 48 R ... v. Muir, supra n.29, at p. 268: trial judge's summing up. 49 Criminal Code Commissioners, 7 th Report (1843), Pari. Pap., Vol. XIX, p. 26. 50 Lee v. Dangar, Grant & Co. [1892] 2 Q.B. 337, 347-349, per Lord Esher. 51 (1847) 2 Cox 262. 52 (1883) 15 Cox 163. 53 (1901) 3 Bom. L.R. 678. 54 Cf. per Lord Denning, M.R. in Gray v. Barr [1971] 2 All E.R. at 954, the case of the ... upon the precise requirements of mens tea is well illustrated ... ...

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