Re Hampshire Land Company

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Date1896
CourtChancery Division
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
180 cases
  • HM Revenue and Customs v Greener Solutions Ltd
    • United Kingdom
    • Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber)
    • 18 d3 Janeiro d3 2012
    ...EWCA Civ 693; [2005] 2 BCLC 328 Belmont Finance Corp Ltd v Williams Furniture Ltd ELR[1979] 1 Ch 250 Hampshire Land Co, Re ELR[1896] 2 Ch 743 JC Houghton & Co v Nothard Lowe & Wills Ltd ELR[1928] AC 1 Kittel v Belgium; Belgium v Recolta Recycling SPRL ECASECASVAT(Joined Cases C-439/04 and C......
  • Orr v Milton Keynes Council
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 1 d2 Fevereiro d2 2011
    ...its left hand did not know what its right hand was doing. Nor, with respect, am I able to agree that the 19 th-century doctrine of In re Hampshire Land [1896] Ch 743 which protects employees from the equivalent of a duty of self-incrimination has any bearing on the present branch of modern ......
  • Safeway Stores Ltd and Others v Twigger and Others
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 21 d2 Dezembro d2 2010
    ...principal and which have, in fact, resulted in harm to his principal. The judge relied on this principle, which takes its name from In Re Hampshire Land Co [1896] 2 Ch. 743, to hold that the maxim ex turpi causa was arguably inapplicable in this case since the acts of the defendants were i......
  • Stone and Rolls Ltd ((in Liquidation)) v Moore Stephens (A Firm)
    • United Kingdom
    • House of Lords
    • 30 d4 Julho d4 2009
    ...relies (i) on a principle of the law of agency known as the Hampshire Land principle after the decision in In re Hampshire Land Company [1896] 2 Ch 743, and (ii) on the principles governing the attribution of actions and states of mind to companies identified in the speech of Lord Hoffmann......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 firm's commentaries
  • Directors, Officers and Employees not Liable for Penalties Imposed by OFT investigation
    • United Kingdom
    • Mondaq United Kingdom
    • 22 d3 Dezembro d3 2010
    ...under the Enterprise Act 2002 which can only be committed by an individual). Safeway also argued that the principle in Re Hampshire Land [1896] 2 Ch 743 meant that the maxim ex turpi causa was arguably inapplicable in this case since the acts of the defendants were, for the purposes of this......
6 books & journal articles
  • Tort Law
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Annual Review No. 2016, December 2016
    • 1 d4 Dezembro d4 2016
    ...at the edge of a precipice at the bottom of which are glass houses. 1 [2016] 2 SLR 940. 2 [2016] 2 SLR 597. 3 Re Hampshire Land Co [1896] 2 Ch 743. 4 [1896] 2 Ch 743. 5 Re Hampshire Land Co [1896] 2 Ch 743 at 749. 6 See Bilta (UK) Ltd v Nazir [2015] 2 All ER 1083. 7 See Ho Kang Peng v Scint......
  • The Insurance Act 2015: Rebalancing the Interests of Insurer and Assured
    • United Kingdom
    • Wiley The Modern Law Review No. 78-6, November 2015
    • 1 d0 Novembro d0 2015
    ...The Nancy n 31 above).45 Mahli vAbbey Life Assurance Co Ltd [1996] LRLR 237.46 Report 353, n 10 above at [10.26] and [10.50] et seq.47 [1896] 2 Ch 743.48 Moore Stephens vStone & Rolls Ltd [2009] 1 AC 1391. But see Jetivia SA vBilta (UK) Ltd [2015]UKSC 23, casting doubt on other aspects of t......
  • CONCEPTUAL CONFUSION
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 2011, December 2011
    • 1 d4 Dezembro d4 2011
    ...“Foreword” in Corporate Criminal Liability (A Pinto & M Evans) (London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2003) at p xv. 103In re Hampshire Land CoELR[1896] 2 Ch 743. 104Stone & Rolls Ltd v Moore StephensELR[2009] 1 AC 1391 at [88] (HL). 105Stone & Rolls Ltd v Moore StephensELR[2009] 1 AC 1391 at [20] (HL).......
  • Attribution in Company Law
    • United Kingdom
    • Wiley The Modern Law Review No. 77-5, September 2014
    • 1 d1 Setembro d1 2014
    ...and Companies’(2013) 13 Journal of Corporate Law Studies 477.2 This principle is derived from the case of In re Hampshire Land Company [1896] 2 Ch 743 (HampshireLand). For criticisms of the Hampshire Land principle, see P. G. Watts (ed), Bowstead & Reynoldson Agency (London: Sweet & Maxwell......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT