Ochs v Ochs Brothers
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Date | 1909 |
| Court | Chancery Division |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
5 cases
-
Go Go Delicacy Pte Ltd v Carona Holdings Pte Ltd and Others
...Investment Ltd v Transtelex Ltd (25 June 1986) (Court of Appeal, Civil Division) (UK); [1987] CLY 3099 (refd) Ochs v Ochs Brothers [1909] 2 Ch 121 (refd) Parker, Gaines & Co, Limited v Turpin [1918] 1 KB 358 (refd) Patel v Patel [2000] QB 551 (refd) Pitchers, Ltd v Plaza (Queensbury), Ltd [......
-
Broadcast Solutions Pte Ltd v Zoom Communications Ltd
...ER 151), attending a summons for directions (County Theatres( [46] supra), Richardson v Le Maitre[1903] 2 Ch 222 and Ochs v Ochs Brothers[1909] 2 Ch 121) and requiring disclosure of documents (Parker, Gaines & Co, Limited v Turpin[1918] 1 KB 358). 25 It may be arguable that a prayer for a s......
-
The Rhodesian Railways Ltd v Mackintosh
...v Le Maitre (1903, 2 Ch. 222); Steven v Buncle (1902, W.N. 44); Cohen v Arthur Cohen (1912, 52 Sol. Jour. 344); Ochs v Ochs Bros. (1909, 2 Ch. 121); Spencer Bower on Estoppel (para. 2449 pp. 238 and 239); Bartlett v Fords Hotel Ltd. (1895, 1 Q.B. 850) and (1896, A.C. 1); Parker Gaines & Co ......
-
Broadcast Solutions Pte Ltd v Zoom Communications Ltd
...151), attending a summons for directions (County Theatres ([46] supra), Richardson v Le Maitre [1903] 2 Ch 222 and Ochs v Ochs Brothers [1909] 2 Ch 121) and requiring disclosure of documents (Parker, Gaines & Co, Limited v Turpin [1918] 1 KB 358). It may be arguable that a prayer for a stay......
Request a trial to view additional results