Sharp Brothers & Knight v Chant

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Date1917
Year1917
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
13 cases
  • Goh Teik Yah; Loo Seong Thye
    • Malaysia
    • Federal Court (Malaysia)
    • Invalid date
  • R v Commissioners of Inland Revenue ex parte Woolwich Equitable Building Society
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 22 May 1991
    ...Sargood Bros v The Commonwealth UNK(1910) 11 CLR 258 Sebel Products Ltd v C & E Commrs ELR[1949] Ch 409 Sharp Bros & Knight v Chant ELR[1917] 1 KB 771 Sharpe, re, (a bankrupt) WLR[1980] 1 WLR 219 Simmonds, ex parte ELR(1885) 16 QBD 308 Slater v Mayor of Burnley (1888) 59 LTNS 636 Somes v Br......
  • Woolwich Equitable Building Society v Commissioners of Inland Revenue
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 22 May 1991
    ...Manchester Corporation [1946] 1 Ch. 236, Romer J.; Mason v. State of New South Wales [1958–9] 102 C.L.R. 108, High Court of Australia; Sharp v. Chant [1917] 1 K.B. 771 C.A.; Slater v. Mayor of Burnley [1888] 59 L.T. 636 Divisional Court; National Pari-Mutuel Association Ltd v. The King [......
  • Dean v Wiesengrund
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal
    • 4 May 1955
    ...tenant notwithstanding any agreement to the country. The Act did not give the tenant a right to recover the excess amount. See Sharp Brothers and knight v. Chant. reported in 1917 1 king's Bench Division at page 771, in which case it was held that money as paid was paid under a mistake of l......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • The Rise and Fall of the Mistake of Law Rule
    • Ireland
    • Trinity College Law Review No. III-2000, January 2000
    • 1 January 2000
    ...of landlord and tenant such deduction of an overpayment from a latter payment of rent was not permitted: Sharp Bros. & Knight v. Chant [1917] 1 KB 771 (CA). (iv) As with other common law spheres of law equity may act to mitigate the potentially harsh consequences of the mistake of law rule.......
  • BRIDGING THE GREAT DIVIDE BETWEEN MISTAKES OF LAW AND FACT IN RESTITUTION: IS THE BRIDGE SAFE TO CROSS?
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 1999, December 1999
    • 1 December 1999
    ...v Simpson[1951] AC 251; cfR v Tower Hamlets LBC, ex parte Chetnik Developments Ltd[1988] AC 858 at 876—7 and Sharp Bros & Knight v Chant[1917] 1 KB 771. Payments made under a mistake of law to an officer of the court may also be recovered: see Ex parte James(1874) LR 9 Ch App 609. Similarly......

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