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 |
Nocton
and
Lord Ashburton et � Contra.
[1914] UKHL J0619-1
House of Lords
1
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...
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
442 cases
- Newacres Sdn Bhd v Sri Alam Sdn Bhd
- Mahoney v Purnell
-
Hedley Byrne & Company Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd
...fraud." 16And for 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 effe......
-
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......
Get Started for Free
2 firm's commentaries
-
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......
26 books & journal articles
-
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......
-
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......
-
Table of cases
...Mutual Fire Insurance Co, [1932] OR 580, [1932] 4 DLR 64, [1932] OJ No 370 (HCJ) ......................... 582 Nocton v Lord Ashburton, [1914] AC 932 (HL) ................................................. 224 Non-Marine Underwriters, Lloyd’s of London v Scalera, 2000 SCC 24 ............283,......
Get Started for Free