Sedgwick (Revenue Officer for Camberwell) v Watney, Combe, Reid and Company, Ltd and Others (ex parte as to Certain Respondents)
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 06 March 1931 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [1931] UKHL J0306-5 |
| Court | House of Lords |
[1931] UKHL J0306-5
House of Lords
After hearing Counsel, as well on Tuesday the 3d as on Thursday the 5th, days of February last, upon the Petition and Appeal of Percy George Sedgwick, of 1, Lewisham Hill, Lewisham. S.E.13, the Revenue Officer for Camberwell, praying, That the matter of the Order set forth in the Schedule thereto, namely, an Order of His Majesty's Court of Appeal, of the 11th of July 1930, might be reviewed before His Majesty the King, in his Court of Parliament, and that the said Order might be reversed, varied, or altered, or that the Petitioner might have such other relief in the premises as to His Majesty the King, in His Court of Parliament, might seem meet; as also upon the printed Case of Watney. Combe, Reid and Company, Limited, lodged in answer to the said Appeal (which said Appeal was, in pursuance of an Order of this House, of the 17th day of December last, heard ex parte as to the Assessment Committee for the Borough of Camberwell Assessment Area and the Rating Authority of the Borough of Camberwell, they not having lodged a printed Case, in answer to the said Appeal though ordered so to do); and due consideration had this day of what was offered on either side in this Cause:
It is Ordered and Adjudged, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in the Court of Parliament of His Majesty the King assembled, That the said Order of His Majesty's Court of Appeal, of the 11th day of July 1930, complained of in the said Appeal, be, and the same is hereby, Affirmed, and that the said Petition and Appeal be, and the same is hereby,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Almond v Heathfield Laundry (Birmingham) Ltd
....... K. R. Almond (Valuation Officer) and Heathfield Laundry ... (instructed by the Solicitor of Inland Revenue) appeared as Counsel for the Respondents. . ... and other cases, and it is this: "Certain decisions will,' it is hoped, prove of very ... before this Court, the Standard Motor Company's case's and it is now clear that premises where ......
-
Toogood & Sons v Green
...disputed by the Crown that, in view of the decision of this House in Hines v. Eastern Counties Farmers' Co-operative Association Ltd., (1931) A.C. 446, the cleaning and sorting of seeds in the present case, taken by itself, was a factory purpose, but they maintained that, looking at the ot......
-
Crowe v Lloyds British Testing Company Ltd
...and "testing" was not within any statutorily defined factory purpose. Lord Dunedin in his speech in the House of Lords in Sedgwick v. Watney, Combe, Reid & Co. in 1931 Appeal Cases, at page 468 said: "Undoubtedly, there is in the works the forging of links to join up the chains which have b......
-
National Institute of Agricultural Botany Trustees v Cambridge County Council ; Chivers & Sons Ltd v Cambridge County Council
...... County of Cambridge Respondents And the Trustees of the National ...The path lay in part across certain land known as Nos. 293, 235, 234 and 211 on the ......