Saturday, December 26, 2009

CASE SUMMARY: PART 5


Butler vs. Fairclough & Anor [1917] 23 CLR 75

Land Law

“It is settled that the term ‘fraud’ as used in that section imports personal dishonesty or moral turpitude”



Byrne vs. Van Tienhoven [1880] 5 CPD 344

Contract Law

“Lindley J: it appears to me that both legal principles and practical conveniences require that a person who has accepted an offer not known to him to have been revoked, shall be in a position safely to act upon the footing that the offer and acceptance constitute a contract binding on both parties”



Camplin vs. DPP [1978] AC 705

Criminal Law

“The reasonable man is a person having the power of self control to be expected of an ordinary person of the sex and age of the accused but in other respects sharing such of the accused characteristic as other think would affect the gravity of the provocation to him”



Canas Property vs. KL Television [1970] 2 All ER 795

Land Law

“A lessor does not affect forfeiture merely by issuing a writ for possession against a lessee or assignee that is in breach of covenant, it is the service, not the issue of the writ which is equivalent to re-entry and affects forfeiture, and the lease is determined from the date of services”



Canny Gabriel Castle Jackson Advertising Pty Ltd and Fourth Media Management Pty Ltd vs. Volume Sales (Finance) Pty Ltd [1974] 3 ALR 409

Law of Partnership

“The partner’s share in the partnership is not a title to specific property but a right to his proportion of the surplus after the realization of the assets and the payment of debt and liability”



Carlill vs. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co [1893] 1 QB 256, CA

Contract Law

“Bowen LJ: if I advertise to the world that my dog is lost and that anybody who brings the dog to particular place will be paid some money, are all the police or the persons whose business it is to find lost dogs, to be expected to sit down and write me a note saying that they have accepted my proposal”



Central London Property Trust Ltd vs. High Trees House Ltd [1947] KB 130

Contract Law

“In each case the court held the promise to be binding on the party making it, even though under the old common law it might be difficult to find any consideration for it”



Central Mortgage and Housing Corp vs. Graham [1973] 43 DLR (3d) 686

Law of Partnership

“Joint adventure may be defined as an association of two or more individuals, corporation, or partnership or some combination of these, for the purpose of carrying on a business venture”



Choa Choon Neoh vs. Spoltiswoode [1869] 1 Ky. 216

●EQUITY●

“The law of England, does not allow the owner of the property to dispose of it for all future ages as he desires except in one case, and that is when his object is of some general benefit to man, or charitable, in the legal sense of the word”



Chooi Siew Cheong vs. Lucky Height Development Sdn Bhd [1995] 1 MLJ 513

Law of Partnership

The Federal Court held that, there was no partnership resulting from a joint venture agreement between a landowner and a housing developer because each party to the agreement intended a wholly separate business, there was no business in common with a view of a profit. Chooi Siew Cheong v Lucky Height Development Sdn Bhd was referred to by the Court of Appeal in Sinnathamby a/l Klondakoundan v Brijkishore a/l Shuparshad[1997] 4 AMR 4004 In this case, there was no joint venture or partnership agreement, only an agreement to build a hotel on a piece of land which the parties was intended to buy for this purpose. The Court of Appeal accepted that there ware no documentary evidences to establish the existences of a partnership.

No comments:

Post a Comment