Sunday, December 27, 2009


Edward vs. Skyways Ltd [1964] AC 445

Law of Partnership

The defendant declared the plaintiff, one of their pilot’s association to pat all pilots who were made redundant an ex gratia sum approximating to the amount which the defendant had contributed to the pension fund. The defendant then refused to make any such payment (mainly because of the large number of redundancies). The plaintiff brought an action for breach of contract. The defendant argued that the use of the words ‘ex gratia’ showed that there was no intention to create legal relations. Megaw J gave the judgment for the plaintiff. He said that, the words ‘ex gratia’ did not negate contractual intention. It is common experience that litigation is frequently compromised on the terms that one party shall make to the other a payment described in express terms as ‘ex gratia’ or ‘without admission of liability’. No one would image that a settlement, so made, is unenforceable at law.

Eley vs. Positive Assurance Co. [19876] Ex D 88

Company Law

“Each member is given contractual rights against the company but only to a limited extent”

Emmanuel Ayodeji Ajayi vs. RT Briscoe (Nigeria) Ltd [1964] 1 WLR 1326, PC

Contract Law

“The principle, which has been described as quasi-estoppel and perhaps more aptly as promissory estoppel, is that when one party to a contract in the absence of fresh consideration agrees not to enforce his rights equity will raised in favour of the other party”

Express Newspaper Ltd vs. Keys [1980] IRLR 247


“In granting the injunction, the judge remarked that the plaintiff did not wish to obtain monetary compensation from the defendants, they wanted their newspapers published”

F vs. West Berkshire Health Authority [1989] 2 All ER 545

Law of Torts

“A prank that gets out of hand, an over-friendly slap on the back, my back transcend the bounds of lawfulness, without being characterized as hostile, the suggested qualification is difficult to reconcile with the principle that any touching of another’s body is, in the absence lawful excuse, capable of amounting to a battery and a trespass”

Faguna Kanta Nath vs. State of Assam AIR [1959] SC 673

Criminal Law

“Under the Indian law for an offence of abetment it is not necessary that the offence should have been committed. A man may be guilty as an abettor whether the offence is committed or not”

Fels vs. Knowles [1906] 26 NZLR 604

Land Law

“The cardinal principal of the statute is that the register is everything, and the except in cases of actual fraud on the part of the person dealing with the registered proprietor such person upon the registration of the title under which he takes from the registered proprietor has an indefeasible title against all the world”

Fletcher vs. Sledmore [1973] RTR 37

Consumer Law

“The statement was made when the dealer to whom he had disposed of the vehicle was selling it to the consumer. It was held that, he was guilty of applying a false trade description although he was not himself selling the goods because he knew that the statement was capable of influencing the sale”

Fisher vs. Bell [1961] 1 QB 394, CA

Contract Law

“It is perfectly clear that according to the ordinary law of contract the display of an article with a price on it in a shop window is merely an invitation to treat. It is in no sense an offer for sale the acceptance of which constitutes a contract”

Ford Motor Co Ltd. vs. Amalgamated Union of Engineering & Foundry Workers [1969] 1 All ER 481

Contract Law

Geoferry Lane J: agreements such as these, composed largely of optimistic aspirations, presenting grave practical problems of enforcement and reached against a background of opinion adverse to enforceability, are, in my judgment not contracts in the legal sense and are not enforceable at law. Without clear and express provisions making them amenable to legal action, they remain in the realm of undertaking binding in honour”

No comments:

Post a Comment