Poyser v Minors
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Court | Court of Appeal |
| Judgment Date | 1881 |
| Date | 1881 |
-
- 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
19 cases
-
R (on the application of Maughan) v HM Senior Coroner for Oxfordshire
...mode of proceeding by which a legal right is enforced and the “the law which gives or defines the right” (per Lush LJ in Poyser v Minors(1881) 7 QBD 329, 333) is not apt in relation to coronial proceedings, which are not concerned with the enforcement of a legal right. Nonetheless rules whi......
-
R v Queen's County Justices
......Hislop (2) ; Poyser v. Minors (3) ; Flitters v. Allfrey (4) ; Hume v. Burton (5) ; Wakefield Corporation v. Cooke (6) ; Irish Land Commission v. Ryan (7) ; The ......
-
First Active Plc v Cunningham
...the Rules of the Superior Courts, the courts' right to order a withdrawal remains extant. 69 The appellant refers to Posner v. Moynes (1881) 7 Q.B.D. 329, where it was said that a non-suit at common law 'decided nothing as regard the matters in dispute, but merely got rid of the pending act......
-
R Ahuja v Cambridge County Court
..."the mode of proceeding by which a legal right is enforced," and "the law which gives or defines the right:" see Poyser v. Minors (1881) 7 Q.B.D. 329, 333, per Lush L.J. Such a distinction is scarcely apt in relation to a coroner's inquisition, which is not concerned with the enforcement of......
Request a trial to view additional results