Montgomerie and Company, Ltd, v Wallace James
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 18 December 1903 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [1903] UKHL J1218-1 |
| Court | House of Lords |
| Date | 18 December 1903 |
[1903] UKHL J1218-1
House of Lords
Montgomerie and Company, Limited,
and
Wallace James.
1
After hearing Counsel, as well on Monday the 16th, Tuesday the 17th, Thursday the 19th, and Friday the 20th, as Monday the 23rd, days of November last, upon the Petition and Appeal of Montgomerie and Company, Limited, registered under the Companies' Acts, and having their Registered Office at 142 West George Street, Glasgow, praying, That the matter of the Interlocutors set forth in the Schedule thereto, namely, an Interlocutor of the Lords of Session in Scotland, of the First Division, of the 23rd of November 1898, also an Interlocutor of the Lord Ordinary there, of the 18th of July 1899, also au Interlocutor of the said Lords of Session there, of the First Division, of the 17th of November 1899, also an Interlocutor of the said Lord Ordinary there, of the 7th of June 1901, and also an Interlocutor of the said Lords of Session there, of the First...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock 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
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
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
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
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
Start Your 7-day Trial
96 cases
-
H.L. v. Can. (A.G.), (2005) 333 N.R. 1 (SCC)
...24 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 213]. Coghlan v. Cumberland, [1898] 1 Ch. 704, refd to. [para. 215]. Montgomerie & Co. v. Wallace-James, [1904] A.C. 73 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 217]. Mersey Docks and Harbour Board v. Procter, [1923] A.C. 253 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 218]. Benmax v. Austin Moto......
-
H.L. v. Can. (A.G.), (2005) 262 Sask.R. 1 (SCC)
...24 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 213]. Coghlan v. Cumberland, [1898] 1 Ch. 704, refd to. [para. 215]. Montgomerie & Co. v. Wallace-James, [1904] A.C. 73 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 217]. Mersey Docks and Harbour Board v. Procter, [1923] A.C. 253 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 218]. Benmax v. Austin Moto......
-
Canada (Attorney General) v. H. L., 2002 SKCA 131
...105, refd to. [para. 37]. Coghlan v. Cumberland, [1898] 1 Ch. 704 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 40]. Montgomerie & Co. v. Wallace-James, [1904] A.C. 73 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 42]. Dominion Trust Co. v. New York Life Insurance Co., [1919] A.C. 254 (P.C.), refd to. [para. 43]. Mersey Docks and......
-
Northern Bank v Charlton
...from the decisions in S.S. Gairloch and Coghland v. Cumberland.It was recognised also in Montgomerie and Company Limited v.Wallace-James 1904 A.C.73 where the Earl of Halsbury L.C. said at75: "It is simply a question of fact, and doubtless, where a question of fact has been decided by a tr......
Get Started for Free
2 books & journal articles
-
Litigation
...Ct Fed Ct]; Watford Electronics Ltd v Sanderson CFL Ltd [2001] BLR 143 at 155 [42], per Chadwick LJ. 1366 Montgomerie & Co v Wallace-James [1904] AC 73 at 75, per Lord Halsbury. An appellate court may substitute its decision on factual matters for that of a trial judge where it would be dis......
-
BOARD OF CUSTOMS & EXCISE V. BARAU
...Manor Nursing Home (1935) A.C. 243, 250. 40. Coghlan v. Cumberland (1898) 1 Ch. 704, 705. 41.Montgomerie & Co. v. Wallace - James (1904) A.C. 73, 75. 42. Usen Friday Ekpo v. The State (1982) 6 S.C. 22. 43.Board of Customs v. Okoro (1971) 2 All N.L.R. 314, 320. 35 44.Folorunsho v. Adeyemi (1......