Richardson v Blackmore; Capital Cabs Ltd v Blackmore

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
CourtCourt of Appeal (Civil Division)
Neutral Citation[2005] EWCA Civ 1356
Year2005
Date2005

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
28 cases
  • Amin and Another v Amin & Others
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 16 March 2010
    ...affect the relief which the court thinks fit to grant…” 415 This proposition is now well-established. In Richardson v Blackmore [2006] BCC 276, CA, Lloyd LJ discussed the effect of the petitioner's misconduct as follows [at 289, paragraph [53]]: “…it seems to me clear that, depending on the......
  • Saxon Woods Investments Ltd (a company incorporated under the laws of the Bahamas) v Francesco Costa
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 22 February 2024
    ...equitable doctrine of clean hands. The approach to this issue in the context of petitions was set out by Lloyd LJ in Richardson v Blackmore [2006] BCC 276 (CA) at [53]: “Nourse J. in Re London School of Electronics Ltd (1985) 1 B.C.C. 99,394 at pp.99,399–99,400 [said that] there is no requi......
  • Interactive Technology Corporation Ltd (Claimant) (1) Jonathan Ferster (Defendants) (2) World Online Software N.v (a company incorporated in Curaçao) and Others
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 15 November 2016
    ...any relief which is granted. These propositions are established by Re London School of Electronics Ltd [1986] Ch 211 at 222 B-C, Richardson v Blackmore [2006] BCC 276 and Grace v Biagioli [2006] BCC 85. 319 As to the first way in which Jonathan's wrongdoing in this case could be relevant, I......
  • Paul Dinglis v Andreas Dinglis
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 5 December 2019
    ...is granted. These propositions are established by Re London School of Electronics Ltd [1986] Ch 211 at 222 B-C, Richardson v Blackmore [2006] BCC 276 and Grace v Biagioli [2006] BCC 85.” 80 I note that in the same case, however, HH Judge Stephen Davies also quoted with approval the followi......
  • Get Started for Free
1 books & journal articles
  • Equity and Trusts
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Annual Review No. 2010, December 2010
    • 1 December 2010
    ...warranting relief …’: Tan Yong San at [106]. With regard to ‘clean hands’, Loh J referred to the judgment of Richardson v Blackmore [2006] BCC 276 where Lloyd LJ found that although the petitioner had forged a letter, this had no immediate or necessary relation to the petitioner“s claim. Wi......