William Cory & Son Ltd v London Corporation
| 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
32 cases
- Close v Steel Company of Wales Ltd
-
Commissioners of Crown Lands v Page
... ... Marylebone in London. The terms of the lease were in common form, and need not be recited. They ... Goddard (Chief Justice) and the Court of Appeal in the case of ( William Cory & Sons Limited v. City of London Corporation 1950 volume 2 All ... ...
-
Meridian Communications Ltd v Eircell Ltd
...that is necessary to be done on his part for the carrying out of that thing." 511 In William Cory and Son Limited-v-London Corporation 1951, 2 K. B. 476 at page 484 in a passage approved by Keane J. in Massarella-v-Massarella, an unreported Judgment delivered on the 18th July 1980 Lord Asqu......
-
Dubai Islamic Bank PJSC v PSI Energy Holding Company BSC (a Bahraini corporation) and Others
...FAD if it was required to do so, since such an implied term would be illegal and contrary to public policy: see by analogy William Cory & Son Ltd v London Corporation [1951] 2 KB 476 at 484 per Asquith LJ. 95 What is more, even if the bona fides of the Bank in that regard could be impugned,......
Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
-
Frustration
...[1946] 1 DLR 342 (NSSC). 127 1999 CanLII 6808 (NWTSC). 128 Ibid at para 15 (relying on Kesmet , above note 83). 129 [1951] 1 KB 8, aff’d [1951] 2 KB 476 (CA). F rustration 681 Pty Ltd v State Rail Authority of NSW , 130 it was held that the granting of an injunction directing that no constr......
-
Public‐Private Arbitration and the Public Interest under English Law
...award are generally private and confidential.157 Aspublic bodies are given their powers on the basis that they are to be exercised152 [1951] 2 KB 476.153 n 144 above, 105-110. See also Dowty Boulton PaulLtd vWolverhampton Corporation [1971] WLR204.154 Section 21(1) provides: ‘An arbitrator o......