Sharpe v San Paulo Railway Company

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
CourtCourt of Appeal
Date1865
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
30 cases
  • Teknik Cekap Sdn Bhd v Villa Genting Development Sdn Bhd
    • Malaysia
    • High Court (Malaysia)
    • 1 January 2000
  • Alexander v Perpetual Trustees Wa Ltd
    • Australia
    • High Court
    • 12 February 2004
    ...that may not exist. 55 InRamage v Waclaw37, Powell J reviewed many of the authorities, including the judgment of James LJ in Sharpe v San Paulo Railway Co38, which support the proposition that, where relief is sought in the equitable jurisdiction of the Supreme Court against a third party, ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 firm's commentaries
  • Know Your Position: An Overview of the Role of the Certifier
    • United Kingdom
    • Mondaq UK
    • 19 July 2018
    ...within an overall heading of "bad faith". See Bailey, Construction Law, ch. 5.142, Vol. 1. 11. Sharpe v San Paulo Railway (1873) L.R. 8 Ch. App, 597. 12. See Keating on Construction Contracts, ch. 5-064; see also Tullis v Jackson (1892) 3 Ch. 441. 13. See Bailey, Construction Law, vol. 1, c......
2 books & journal articles
  • Contract administration
    • United Kingdom
    • Construction Law. Volume I - Third Edition
    • 13 April 2020
    ...HKCFI 965 at [87], per Reyes J; De Grazia v Solomon [2010] NSWSC 322 at [26], per Einstein J. 542 Sharpe v San Paulo Railway Co (1873) LR 8 Ch App 597 at 609, per James LJ. 543 See WW Gear Construction Ltd v McGee Group Ltd (2010) 131 Con LR 63 at 74 [17(c)], per Akenhead J. 544 See W Hing ......
  • The End of Knowing Receipt
    • Canada
    • Canadian Journal of Comparative and Contemporary Law No. 2-1, January 2016
    • 1 January 2016
    ...of Legal Claims by Cestuis Que Trust and Assignees” (2008) 22 Trust Law International 140 at 156; Sharpe v San Paulo Railway Co (1873), LR 8 Ch App 597 (Eng) at 609-10; Vandepitte v Preferred Accident Insurance Corp of New York , [1933] AC 70 (PC (Canada)) at 79. 92. [1991] 2 AC 548 (HL). 9......

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