Tombling v Universal Bulb Company Ltd
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Date | 1951 |
| Court | Court of Appeal |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
24 cases
-
Meek v Fleming
...or been mislod by speeches of counsel, those are undoubtedly sufficient grounds for interfering with the verdict". 18 In Tombling v. Univarsal Bulb Company Ltd. (1951 volume 2 Times Law Reports, page 289) it was sought to adduce fresh evidence on the ground that there had not been revealed ......
- Cheah Cheng Hoc v PP
- Hoo Lin Coln v Wong Weng Woh
-
Law Society of Ireland v Walker
...S24 R v O'CONNELL & ORS 1844 7 ILR RONDEL v WORSLEY 1967 1 QB 502 MEEK v FLEMING 1961 3 AER 148 TOMBLING v UNIVERSAL BULB COMPANY LTD 1951 2 TLR 289 RE GRUZMAN EX PARTE PROTHONOTARY 1968 SR (NSW) 70 GIANNARELLI & ORS v WRAITH & ORS 1987-1988 165 CLR 543 UNIOIL INTERNATIONAL PTY LTD & ORS v ......
Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
-
Adversarialism goes West
...‘the ‘‘adversarial dialectic’’ and the ‘‘principleof orality’’ have been elevated13. Lord Denning in Tombling vUniversal Bulb Co Ltd [1951] 2 TLR 289: ‘He must not, of course, knowingly mislead the court,either on the facts or on the law, but short of that, he may put such matters in eviden......