Re Ridler. Ridler v Ridler

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Date1882
Year1882
CourtCourt of Appeal

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex
15 cases
  • Quah Kay Tee v Ong & Co Pte Ltd
    • Singapore
    • Court of Appeal (Singapore)
    • 12 November 1996
    ...The fraudulent intention will be attributed to the settlor: see Cornish v Clark (1872) LR 14 Eq 184; Re Ridler, Ridler v Ridler (1883) 22 Ch D 74 at p 82; Re Maddever (1884) 27 Ch D 523 at p 526; Green v Paterson (1886) 32 Ch D 95 at p 105. And the fraudulent intent may be imputed because, ......
  • Regal Castings Ltd v G M and G N Lightbody and
    • New Zealand
    • Supreme Court
    • 23 October 2008
    ...13 Eliz. c. 5 but which he thought were “equally applicable in relation to s 60”.27 The first two propositions were:28 24 25 26 27 28 (1883) 22 ChD 74 at p 80 (CA) per Selborne [1974] 2 NZLR 1 at p 7 (SC), citing Cotton LJ at p 82. See, for instance, Re Hale [1989] 2 NZLR 503 at pp 508 – 50......
  • Trustee in Bankruptcy of The Estate of R.P.J. Pelletier v O. Pelletier and Four Others
    • Cayman Islands
    • Grand Court (Cayman Islands)
    • 31 July 2020
    ...Ch. 223; [1992] 3 All E.R. 1, referred to. (16)Pen-y-Van Colliery Co., In re (1877), 6 Ch. D. 477, referred to. (17)Ridler v. Ridler (1882), 22 Ch. D. 74; 52 L.J. Ch. 343, considered. (18)Spiliada Maritime Corp. v. Cansulex Ltd. (“The Spiliada”), [1987] A.C. 460; [1986] 3 W.L.R. 972; [1986]......
  • O. Pelletier, PDP Corporation and PDP Holdings Inc. v Trustee in Bankruptcy of the Estate of R.P.J. Pelletier
    • Cayman Islands
    • Court of Appeal (Cayman Islands)
    • 23 February 2021
    ...18 FLR 317, considered. (15) Paramount Airways Ltd., In re, [1993] Ch. 223; [1992] 3 All E.R. 1, considered. (16) Ridler v. Ridler(1882), 22 Ch. D. 74; 52 L.J. Ch. 343, considered. (17) Strategic Turnaround Master Partnership Ltd., In re, 2008 CILR 447, considered. (18) Sutherland, In re, [......
  • Get Started for Free