Nocton v Lord Ashburton et è Contra
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judgment Date | 19 June 1914 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [1914] UKHL J0619-1 |
| Court | House of Lords |
| Date | 19 June 1914 |
[1914] UKHL J0619-1
House of Lords
After hearing Counsel, as well on Thursday the 23d, Friday the 24th, and Monday the 27th, days of April last, as on Friday the 1st, and Friday the 8th, days of May last, upon the Petition and Appeal of William Nocton, of 13 Great Marl-borough Street, in the County of London, praying, that the matter of the Order set forth in the Schedule thereto, namely, an Order of His Majesty's Court of Appeal, of the 31st of October 1912, might be reviewed before His Majesty the King in His Court of Parliament, and that the said Order might be reversed, varied, or altered, or that the Petitioner might have such other relief in the premises as to His Majesty the King in His Court of Parliament might seem meet; as also upon the Petition and Cross Appeal of the Right Honourable Francis Denzil Edward, Baron Ashburton, of The Grange, Alresford, in the County of Hants, praying, that the matter of the Order set forth in the Schedule thereto, namely, the said Order of His Majesty's Court of Appeal, of the 31st of October 1912, so far as therein stated to be appealed against, might be reviewed before His Majesty the King in His Court of Parliament, and that the said Order, so far as aforesaid, might be varied or altered, and that the Petitioner might have the relief prayed for in the Cross Appeal, or such other relief in the premises as to His Majesty the King in His Court of Parliament might seem meet; as also upon the printed Case of William Nocton, and also upon the printed Case of the Right Honourable Francis Denzil Edward, Baron Ashburton, lodged in the said Original and Cross Appeals; and due consideration had this day of what was offered on either side in these Appeals:
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 His Majesty's Court of Appeal, of the 31st day of October...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Newacres Sdn Bhd v Sri Alam Sdn Bhd
-
Friends' Provident Life Office (A Firm) v Hillier Parker May & Rowden; Estates & General Plc and Others, third parties
...in the form of restitution of that which has been lost to the trust estate, not damages. Viscount Haldane L.C. in Nocton v. Ashburton [1914] AC 932,952 referred to the 'more elastic' remedies of the Court of Chancery than those of the common law courts, and said: 'Operating in personam as a......
-
Hedley Byrne & Company Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd
...the next twenty years it was generally assumed that Derry v. Peek decided that. But it was shown in this House in Nocton v. Ashburton [1914] A.C. 932 that that is much too widely stated. We cannot, therefore, now accept as accurate the numerous statements to that effect in cases between 188......
-
Argentine Holdings v BA Hotel
...Ltd. v. Whinney, [1912] A.C. 254; [1911-13] All E.R. Rep. 344, observations of Lord Atkinson applied. (17) Nocton v. Ashburton (Lord), [1914] A.C. 932; [1914-15] All E.R. Rep. 45, dicta of Viscount Haldane, L.C. applied. (18) Patten v. Burke Publishing Co. Ltd., [1991] 1 W.L.R. 541; [1991] ......
-
Employees ' Damages for breach of contractual and fiduciary obligations
...by the errant fiduciary. Nevertheless, the primary purpose of equitable compensation or damages is compensatory (Nocton v Lord Ashburton [1914] AC 932; Re Dawson (1966) 84 WN (Pt 1) (NSW) 399). No element of penalty is involved." (Meagher, Gummow and Lehane, Equity: Doctrines & Remedies (4t......
-
Employees ' Damages for breach of contractual and fiduciary obligations
...by the errant fiduciary. Nevertheless, the primary purpose of equitable compensation or damages is compensatory (Nocton v Lord Ashburton [1914] AC 932; Re Dawson (1966) 84 WN (Pt 1) (NSW) 399). No element of penalty is involved." (Meagher, Gummow and Lehane, Equity: Doctrines & Remedies (4t......
-
Ten key principles of fraud and the requirement of specificity: Nadinic v Drinkwater [2017] NSWCA 114
...is used in civil litigation. At common law the position is set out in Derry v Peek [1889] UKHL 1 and in equity in Nocton v Lord Ashburton [1914] AC 932, the difference turning on the state of mind of the person said to have committed the fraud. At common law, fraud is proved when it is show......
-
AN ACCOUNT OF ACCOUNTS
...Ltd v Hall (2013) 16 HKCFAR 61 at [170], per Millett NPJ. 48 Jamie Glister, “Breach of Trust and Consequential Loss”(2014) 8 J Eq 235. 49[1914] AC 932. 50 See Matthew Conaglen, “Equitable Compensation for Breach of Fiduciary Dealing Rules”(2003) 119 LQR 246; James Edelman, “Nocton v Lord As......
-
Defining Fraud: An Argument in Favour of a General Offence of Fraud
...ν Isherwood (1783) 1 Bro. CC 558. James ν Morgan (1663) 1 Lev. 111. Millington ν Fox (1838) 3 My and Cr 338 Norton ν Lord Ashburton (1914) AC 932. Oakes ν Turquand (1872) LR 2 HL. Overend Gurney ν Gibb (1872) LR 5 HL Pear's Case (1780) 1 Leach 212. Peek ν Gurney (1873) LR 6 HL. R v Allsop (......
-
Table of cases
...of Canada (1976), 69 D.L.R. (3d) 99, [1976] M.J. No. 172 (C.A.) ......................................227, 320 Nocton v. Lord Ashburton, [1914] A.C. 932 (H.L.) ............................................ 218 Norama Design Inc. v. CGU Insurance Co. of Canada, 2007 CanLII 17034 (Ont. S.C.J.)......
-
Table of cases
...Noble v Alley, [1951] SCR 64 .............................................................................. 595 Nocton v Lord Ashburton, [1914] AC 932, [1914–15] All ER Rep 45, 111 LT 641 (HL) .............................................................................657–59, 673 Norberg v......