Smith (Pauper) v Charles Baker and Sons
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judgment Date | 02 July 1891 |
| Court | House of Lords |
| Date | 02 July 1891 |
[1891] UKHL J072L-1
House of Lords
After hearing Counsel as well on Monday the 1st as Tuesday the 2nd and Thursday the 4th days of December 1890, upon the Petition and Appeal of Joseph Smith, of No. 18, Mill Lane, Boothtown, in Halifax, in the County of York, Navvy, praying, That the matter of the Order set forth in the Schedule thereto, namely, an Order of Her Majesty's Court of Appeal, of the 30th of May 1889, might be reviewed before Her Majesty the Queen in Her 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 Her Majesty the Queen in Her Court of Parliament might seem meet; as also upon the printed case of Charles Baker and Sons, lodged in answer to the said Appeal; 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 Her Majesty the Queen assembled, That the said Order of Her Majesty's Court of Appeal, of the 30th of May 1889, complained of in the said Appeal, be, and the same is hereby Reversed; and that the Judgment or Order of the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court of Justice, of the 29th of January 1889, be, and the same is hereby Restored: And it is Ordered, That the Respondents do pay or cause to be paid to the Appellant the Costs incurred by him in the said Court of Appeal: And it is further Ordered, That the said Respondents do pay or cause to be paid to the said Appellant the Costs incurred by him in respect of his said Appeal to this...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jones v Department of Employment
...11 Mr. Hill-Smith based his objection on the long standing practice derived from the decision of the House of Lords in Smith v. Baker (1891) A.C. 325. In his speech in that case Lord Halsbury L.C. said at page 333: "My Lords, this was an action originally tried in the county court, and it i......
-
Pittalis v Grant
...was not raised before the county court judge. And so we must also decide whether it can be raised now; cf. Smith v. Baker & Sons [1891] A.C. 325. 3 By a head lease dated 9th December 1882 the dwelling-house and shop now known as 92 High Road, East Finchley, London N.2 ("the property") was d......
-
Blacklion Law LLP v Amira Nature Foods Ltd and Another
...not on that pleading make, and should not have made, an order for possession, …” Having noted the rule in Smith Charles Baker & Sons [1891] AC 325, to the effect that on appeals from the county court the appeal court will not entertain a ground for appeal which had not been taken below, Eve......
-
Raymond Peter Foulkes Claimant v Saint Lucia Air & Sea Ports Authority Defendant [ECSC]
...that the maxim "volenti non fit injuria" applies to defeat the Claimant's claim for according to Lord Herschell inSmith v Baker (1891) AC 325" the maxim is founded in good sense and justice". The Claimant's injury I am satisfied was due solely to his own fault. 70 I therefore reject the Cla......
-
WORKPLACE SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN SINGAPORE: THE LEGAL CHALLENGE
...in the amenity value of the property). 112 See generally 20 Halsbury’s Laws (4th ed, 1976) at para 546. 113 Smith v Baker & Sons [1891] AC 325 (HL); Wilsons and Clyde Coal Co Ltd v English[1938] 3 All ER 628 (HL); Paris v Stepney Borough Council[1951] 1 All ER 42 (HL); Latimer v AEC Co[1953......
-
Tort law, risk, and technological innovation in England.
...of the risk inherent in dangerous working conditions, and voluntary acceptance of such a risk: Smith v Baker & Sons, [1891] UKHL 2, [1891] AC 325 HL (81) The defence is conventionally traced back to Priestley, supra note 69, but it was not until Hutchinson v York, Newcastle and Berwick ......
-
A social security perspective of employees’ compensation law in Nigeria
...(Eastern States); the Law Reform (Torts) Act 1961 (Lagos State); s 13 of the Torts Law, Laws of Ogun State 2006). 18 In Smith v Baker (1891) AC 325, the defendant was held liable for negligence as the defendant failed to take due precautions to prevent the injury to the plaintiff. It was fu......
-
EJIFODOMI V. OKONKVVO
...v. Sycroft (1954) 3 All E.R. 455 at 459 - 460. 5. ,4kpene v. Barclays Bank of Nigeria Ltd and Anor. (1977) 1 S.C. 47. 6. Smith v. Bakers (1891) A.C. 325. 7. Okpaku v. Okpaku (1947) W.A.C.A. 137. 8. Timitimi v. Amabebe 14 W.A.C.A. 374. 45 9. Gdynia Ameryka Linie Zeghigowe Spo/ka Akcyjna v. B......