Place v Searle
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Year | 1932 |
| Date | 1932 |
| Court | Court of Appeal |
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
14 cases
-
Best v Samuel Fox & Company Ltd
...Such a claim was put forward upon the analogy of the enticement cases of which the most recent are Gray v. Gee (1923) 39 T.L.R., 429 and Place v. Searle [1932] 2 K.B.D., 497. In the first, the jury found for the defendant, and in the latter, the statement that the wife had the same right as......
-
F v Metropolitan Borough of Wirral DC and Another
...been expressed in terms of general applicability: thus per Lord MacNaghten in Quinn v. Leatham cited above. In a different context, in Place v. Searle [1932] 2 K.B. a husband claimed damages against the defendant for enticing away the plaintiff's wife. Scrutton L.J. explained the basis of t......
-
Sheffield City Council v E and S
...now to imagine the role of the married woman in the nineteenth century, or even fifty years ago for that matter. 118 In Place v Searle [1932] 2 KB 497 at p 499 McCardie J explained how: "Broadly speaking, it was the view of lawyers and of the law in the middle of the eighteenth century tha......
-
John Fairfax Publications Pty Ltd v Rivkin
...Co [1935] AC 346 at 373-375 per Lord Wright. 163Cox v English, Scottish, and Australian Bank [1905] AC 168 at 170 per Lord Davey. 164Place v Searle [1932] 2 KB 497 at 515 per Scrutton 165Hocking v Bell (1945) 71 CLR 430 at 501 per Dixon J. 166 See s 102 of the Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW). ......
Get Started for Free