Lingley v Firth & Sons
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Court | Court of Appeal |
| Date | 1921 |
| Year | 1921 |
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart 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
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
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
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
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
Start Your Free Trial
12 cases
-
Shotts Iron Company Ltd v Fordyce
...was seriously injured; he had to keep resting; his foot gave him great pain and frequently gave way under him. In Lingley v. Thomas Firth & Sons, Limited (1921) 1 K.B., 655, the workwoman knew that she had been seriously injured, but concealed the fact from her employers and, as the Master ......
-
Pang Chen Suan v Commissioner for Labour
...reasonable cause under s 11(4) of the Act, viz, Prophet v Roberts (1918) 11 BWCC 301, Lingley v Thomas Firth and Sons, Limited [1921] 1 KB 655 (“Lingley”) and L A Sheridan, “Late National Insurance Claims: Cause for Delay” (1956) 19 MLR (c) Lastly, the Commissioner’s decision to accept Tan’......
-
Maddalozzo and ORS v Maddick [NTR]
...Act were, at least by some judges, regarded as a mere technicality and of slight importance: cf Lingley v Thomas Firth and Sons Ltd (1921) 1 KB 655 at 662. Rarely was an employee denied compensation under that provision. In my opinion, the draftsman of the present Act, at least so far as t......
-
Pang Chen Suan v Commissioner for Labour
...added that it is a “substantial and material protection to the employer”. This view was also taken in Lingley v Thomas Firth & Sons Ltd [1921] 1 KB 655 (“Lingley”) by Scrutton LJ, who added at 671 that in considering what a “reasonable cause” for a delayed claim is, one must consider both t......
Get Started for Free