Re London and General Bank (No. 2)

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date1895
Date1895
Year1895
CourtCourt of Appeal
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
36 cases
  • JSI Shipping (S) Pte Ltd v Teofoongwonglcloong (A Firm)
    • Singapore
    • High Court (Singapore)
    • 6 December 2006
    ...(1887) 36 Ch D 787 (distd) Lloyd Cheyham & Co Ltd v Littlejohn & Co [1987] BCLC 303 (folld) London and General Bank (No 2),In re [1895] 2 Ch 673 (folld) Pacific Acceptance Corporation Ltd v Forsyth (1970) 92 WN (NSW) 29 (distd) United Project Consultants Pte Ltd v Leong Kwok Onn [2005] 4 SL......
  • Singapore Society of Accountants; Wong Kok Chin
    • Malaysia
    • High Court (Malaysia)
    • 1 January 1990
  • International Shipping Co (Pty) Ltd v Bentley
    • South Africa
    • Invalid date
    ...v Thompson 1949 (1) SA 445 (A); Leeds Estate, Building and Investment Co v Shepherd (1887) 36 Ch 787; London & General Bank (No 2) [1895] 2 Ch 673 (CA); Fomento (Sterling D Area) Ltd v Selsdon Fountain Pen Co Ltd [1958] 1 All ER 11 (HL); Pacific Acceptance Corp Ltd v Forsyth [1970] 92 WN (N......
  • Thoroughbred Breeders' Association v Price Waterhouse
    • South Africa
    • Invalid date
    ...1 Ch 407 (CA): considered In re Kingston Cotton Mill Co (No 2) [1896] 2 Ch 279 (CA): referred to In re London and General Bank (No 2) [1895] 2 Ch 673 (CA): referred to H International Shipping Co (Pty) Ltd v Bentley 1990 (1) SA 680 (A): referred Jaga v Dönges NO and Another; Bhana v Dönges ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
4 books & journal articles
  • The contemporary auditor -a watchdog: new wine in old wine skins?
    • Barbados
    • Caribbean Law Review No. 10-1, June 2000
    • 1 June 2000
    ...be saddled with responsibility. It is submitted, however, that the failure to hold auditors liable 82 Re London And General Bank {No.2) [1895] 2Ch 673. 83 Re Thomas Gerrard&Son Ltd [1968] Ch455. 84 [1895] 2 Ch.673. 85 [1964] AC 465. 86 [1978] AC 728. 87 [1981] 3 All ER 289. 88 [1990] 2 AC 6......
  • WHO LEFT THE GATES UNLOCKED? RECONCILING THE DUTIES OF AUDITORS AND COMPANY DIRECTORS
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 2008, December 2008
    • 1 December 2008
    ...32 PlanAssure PAC v Gaelic Inns Pte Ltd [2007] 4 SLR 513 at [33]. 33 PlanAssure PAC v Gaelic Inns Pte Ltd [2007] 4 SLR 513 at [34]. 34 [1895] 2 Ch 673. The Singapore Court of Appeal cited with approval the opinion of Lindley LJ in In re London and General Bank (No 2)[1895] 2 Ch 673 at 682—6......
  • The prevention and detection of corporate fraud: An assessment of the present framework
    • United Kingdom
    • Emerald Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance No. 5-4, April 1997
    • 1 April 1997
    ...and Reporting of Fraud, Other Illegal Acts and Error', BAA Conference, Bristol. (3) See Nichol's Case [1859] 3 DeG & J 387. (4) (No. 2) [1895] 2 Ch. 673. (5) (No. 2) [1896] 2 Ch. 279. (6) p. 683. (7) p. 288. (8) pp. 289-290. (9) Lee, T.A. (1986) 'Company Auditing', Van Nostrand Reinhold (UK......
  • The Auditor’s Legal Responsibilities in the Detection of Fraud
    • South Africa
    • Juta South Africa Mercantile Law Journal No. , August 2019
    • 16 August 2019
    ...have not def‌ined the practical meaning of the expression ‘paying66Supra note 49 at 65.67Idem at 66. In Re London General Bank (No 2) [1895] 2 Ch 673 (CA) at 683 the Court held that‘where there is nothing to excite suspicion very little inquiry will reasonably be sufficient, and inpractice ......

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