Pawsey v Armstrong

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
CourtChancery Division
Year1880
Date1880

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
8 cases
  • Walker v Hirsch
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal
    • Invalid date
  • Miles v Clarke
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • Invalid date
    ... ... Pawsey v. Armstrong (1881) 18 Ch.D. 698 followed ... The plaintiff and the defendant carried on business as partners for two years in the following ... ...
  • Ham v Bell and Others
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 11 April 2016
    ...then referred me to Blackett-Ord & Haren Partnership Law 5 th Edition 2015 at paragraph 8.21, to Burdon v Barkus (1862) 4 De GF&J 42, Pawsey v Armstrong (1881) 18 Ch. D. 698, Miles v Clarke [1953] 1 WLR 537 and to Davies v H & E Ecroyd Ltd [1996] 2 EGLR 5. 38 Therefore, he argued that the f......
  • Commissioner of Customs and Excise v Randles Brothers & Hudson Ltd
    • South Africa
    • 20 May 1941
    ...(1 S.C. 291 at pp. 302-3 and 2 S.C. 172 at pp. 173,175); Ex parte Delhasse, in re Mogevand (7 Ch. D. 511 at p. 527); Pawsey v Armstrong (18 Ch. D. 698); McAdams v Fiander' s Trustee & Bell N.O. (1919 AD 207, at pp. 216, 223, 224, An essential of a sale is the fixing of a price with an inten......
  • Get Started for Free