Winkworth v Christie Manson and Woods Ltd
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Date | 1980 |
| Court | Chancery Division |
-
- 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
11 cases
-
Diamond Centre Pte Ltd and Another v R Esmerian, Inc and Another and Another Appeal
...v Sewell (1860) 5 H & N 728; Janesich v George Attenborough & Son (1910) 26 TLR 278 and Winkworth v Christie Manson and Woods Ltd & Anor (1980) 1 Ch 496. Janesich v George Attenborough is directly in point. In that case, the plaintiff, a Parisian jeweller, entrusted a diamond necklace to G ......
-
Trade Credit Finance No (1) Ltd and National Westminster Bank Plc and Dinc Bilgin Lime Company Ltd and Coutts & Company
...Farm v Suffolk Agricultural Poultry Producers Ass. [1966] 1 WLR 278, 330; Cammell v Sewell (1858) 3 H&N 617, 5 H&N 728; Winkworth v Christie Manson and Woods Ltd [1980] Ch 496), Sabah acquired good title in the press when it was delivered to Sabah in Turkey. It is also unaffected by the fac......
-
Dornoch Ltd v Westminster International BV [QBD (Admiralty)]
...must resolve under this Issue as to the applicability of the doctrine of renvoi was identified and expressly left open by Slade J in Winkworth v. Christie [1980] Ch. 496 at 514DE and by Moore-Bick J in Glencore v. Metro [2001] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 284 at 297. However in two further decisions at f......
-
Macmillan Inc. v Bishopsgate Investment Trust Plc (No. 3)
...it is, that disposition is binding everywhere." 93This was treated as the general rule, although subject to exceptions, in Winkworth v. Christie Manson & Woods Ltd (1990) Ch.496. It was applied by the House of Lords to a dispute about priority in Inglis v. Robertson (1898) AC 616, although ......
Request a trial to view additional results
1 firm's commentaries
-
The Restitution, Repatriation, and Return of Cultural Objects: When Objects Go Back
...and were taken to Italy, where they were sold to an apparently innocent purchaser. [See Winkworth v. Christie, Manson & Woods Ltd., [1980] Ch. 496 , [1980] 1 All E.R. 1121]. Later, that purchaser consigned the artworks to an auction house in London for sale. The collector from whom the obje......
7 books & journal articles
-
THE FINE ART OF FRAUD.
...40, at 7-001. (56) Tettenborn, above, note 52, at p. 156. (57) For example, Italy. (58) Winkworth v. Christie Manson & Woods Ltd [1980] 2 W.L.R. 937; Iran v. Berend [2007] EWHC (59) (1858) 3 H & N 617, at p. 638. (60) Winkworth v. Christie Manson & Woods Ltd [1980] 2 W.L.R. 937.......
-
Table of Cases
...(4th) 319 (Man CA) .......................................................................147 Winkworth v Christie Manson and Woods Ltd, [1980] Ch 496 (Ch D) ........... 236 Winter v Keating (1978), 35 APR 633, 24 NSR (2d) 633 (CA) ...........................260 Wylie v McCarron, 2020 NBCA ......
-
Table of cases
...3 W.W.R. 57, [1983] A.J. No. 559 (Q.B.) ........................................... 320 Winkworth v. Christie, Manson and Woods Ltd., [1980] Ch. 496, [1980] 1 All E.R. 1121 .......................................................... 333, 334 Winmill v. Winmill, [1974] 1 F.C. 686, 47 D.L.R. (......
-
Competing Rights
...to tell them apart. The law provides rules to resolve the competing claims of those who owned the goods that went into the mixture. 7 [1980] Ch 496 (Ch D). Competing Right s 237 B. COMMON LAW 1) Nemo Dat When dealing with a competition between legal property rights, the best place to start ......
Request a trial to view additional results