Penny v Wimbledon Urban District Council
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Date | 1899 |
| Year | 1899 |
| Court | Court of Appeal |
-
- 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
34 cases
- Parimala a/p Muthusamy and Others v Projek Lebuhraya Utara-Selatan
-
David Stewart+doreen Kennedy Stewart V. Aftab Ahmed Malik
...and relied on by the respondents, referred only to English decisions (Bower v Peate (1876) L.R. 1 Q.B.D. 321; Penny v Wimbledon UDC [1899] 2 Q.B. 72; Dalton v Angus. In analogous contexts the House of Lords had not been keen to extend the exception in that jurisdiction (Ferguson v Welsh [19......
-
Francois Maartens Heynike (Executor of the Estate of David Hill, Deceased) v (1) 00222648 Ltd (Formerly Birlec Ltd)
...does something careless or foolish in the execution of perfectly properly and carefully planned works. Romer LJ in Penny v Wimbledon UDC [1899] 2 QB 72, said of that kind of case, at p. 78: “… accidents arising from what is called casual or collateral negligence cannot be guarded against be......
-
Leichhardt Municipal Council v Montgomery
...consequential orders proposed by them. 1 Hardaker v Idle District Council [1896] 1 QB 335 ; Penny v Wimbledon Urban District Council [1899] 2 QB 72; Holliday v National Telephone Company [1899] 2 QB 392; Salsbury v Woodland [1970] 1 QB 324; Rowe v Herman [1997] 1 WLR 2 Roads & Traffic Au......
Request a trial to view additional results