Russell v Wakefield Waterworks Company

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
CourtEquity
Year1865
Date1865

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
35 cases
3 books & journal articles
  • 'The receipt of what?': Questions concerning third party recipient liability in equity and unjust enrichment.
    • Australia
    • Melbourne University Law Review Vol. 31 No. 1, April 2007
    • 1 April 2007
    ...Finance Corporation v Williams Furniture Ltd [No 2] [1980] 1 All ER 393, 405 (Buckley L J), citing Russell v Wakefield Waterworks Co (1875) LR 20 Eq 474, 479 (Jessel MR); Rolled Steel Products (Holdings) Ltd v British Steel Corporation [1986] Ch 246, 297-8 (Slade LJ); Robins (2003) 175 FLR ......
  • A comparative analysis of derivative action in Cypriot company law: Comparison with English company law and the prospect of statutory reform
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law No. 29-1, February 2022
    • 1 February 2022
    ...in Cyprus, p. 260; P. Paf‌itis, Company Law and Law ofPartnership in the Republic Of Cyprus (Vassiliades & Co LLC, 2016), p. 516.106. (1875) LR 20 Eq 474; at 480, Sir George Jessel MR said, of all the exceptions to the rule in Foss v. Harbottle that: ‘Theexceptions depend very much on the n......
  • ULTRA VIRES AND CORPORATE CAPACITY IN SINGAPORE
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 1989, January - December 1989
    • 1 December 1989
    ...of Appeal, England). 38. Edwards v Halliwell[1950] 2 All ER 1064 (Court of Appeal, England). 39. Russell v Wakefield Waterworks Co(1875) LR 20 Eq 474 (Master of the Rolls’ Court, England). 40. Ibid, at pp 481—482 per Jessel MR. 41. Hawkesbury Development Co Ltd v Landmark Finance Pty Ltd(19......