Mint v Good

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
CourtCourt of Appeal
Date1950
Year1950

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
23 cases
  • Sleafer v Lambeth Borough Council, C.A.
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal
    • 2 July 1959
    ...been made the subject of an express term. 24 Mr. Beney relied strongly on something said by Lord Somervell in this Court in the case of Mint V. Good, 1951, 1 King's Bench, page 517. The question which there arose was in reference to liability for a nuisance on premises to a passer - by on t......
  • Brew Brothers Ltd v Snax (Ross) Ltd
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 22 July 1969
    ...to the less dogmatic views expressed in other textbooks cited to the Court. Mr. Drake, on the other hand, referred to ( Mint v. Good 1951 1 King's Bench 517) and the cases there cited: he then submitted that even if the older authorities supported Mr. Blundells submission (which he conteste......
  • McAuley v Bristol City Council
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 25 June 1991
    ... ... (d) Pay to the Council the cost of making good all damage to the premises (other than that resulting from ordinary fair wear and tear) including broken windows, on the fixtures and fittings ... Further, it was argued that an implied right to enter and to do repairs to the garden, including the step, should be implied at law: see Mint v. Good [1951] 1 K.B. 517 ... The council, in the circumstances of this case, should be held to have had the implied right to do any repairs which ... ...
  • Hunter et al. v. Canary Wharf Ltd.; Hunter et al. v. London Docklands Development Corp., (1997) 215 N.R. 1 (HL)
    • Canada
    • 24 April 1997
    ...(1992), 419 S.E.2d 661 (Va.), refd to. [para. 107]. Martin Davies Case (1990), 20 W.A.L.R. 129, refd to. [para. 113]. Mint v. Good, [1951] 1 K.B. 517 (C.A.), refd to. [para. Jacobs v. London County Council, [1950] A.C. 361 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 113]. Hale v. Jennings Brothers, [1938] 1 Al......
  • Get Started for Free