INSERT INTO `courtrulings` (`id`, `title`, `content`, `link`, `isshow`, `author`, `date`, `courttype`, `summary`, `presiding`, `casetype`, `subjectmatter`, `caseno`, `counsel1`, `counsel2`, `courtname`, `caseDate`, `subjectmattertitle`) VALUES
(6141, 'Re Spence’s Estate, Barclays Bank Ltd v Stockton-on-Tees Corporation', '', '../links/cases/Re Spence vrs stocton and tees ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Gibson & Weldon., Stockton-on-Tees., Bell Brodrick & Gray', '1937', 'Appeal', 'Re Spence’s Estate, Barclays Bank Ltd v Stockton-on-Tees Corporation By his will a testator gave a collection of antiques to the defendant corporation subject to the condition that the corporation should deposit them in one of the rooms of a public hall, hereinafter referred to, where they were to be kept open to inspection by the public, subject to such reasonable restrictions and regulations as might be imposed by the corporation.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-07-19', 'CHARITIES'),
(6142, 'Re Strickland’s Estate, National Guarantee and Suretyship Association Ltd v Maidment', '', '../links/cases/Re Strickland vrs maidment.pdf', 'Yes', 'Lazarus Son & L A Hart., Samuel Tonkin Booth & Co', '1937', 'High Court', 'Re Strickland’s Estate, National Guarantee and Suretyship Association Ltd v Maidment The plaintiff issued a writ in the Chancery Division claiming an account and payment of all sums due to her under a contract entered into by the plaintiff with the defendant.', 'J MacGillivray Asher Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-07-28', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6143, 'Re Syston and Thurmaston Gas, Light and Coke Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Re Syston and Thurmaston Gas.pdf', 'Yes', 'Field Roscoe & Co., Leicester', '1937', 'Supreme', 'Re Syston and Thurmaston Gas, Light and Coke Co Ltd No provision was made in the memorandum or articles of a statutory company, which had a capital of £10,000, either for the distribution of surplus assets in the event of a winding up or for dividends, except that the directors could declare a dividend to the members in proportion to their shares.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-03-18', 'COMPANY'),
(6144, 'Re Talbot-Ponsonby’s Estate, Talbot-Ponsonby v Talbot-Ponsonby', '', '../links/cases/Re Talbot.pdf', 'Yes', 'Gregory Rowcliffe & Co', '1937', 'High Court', 'Re Talbot-Ponsonby’s Estate, Talbot-Ponsonby v Talbot-Ponsonby A testator by his will devised the L estate to his son upon condition that he made the same his home, and upon the further condition that he did not allow a named person to set foot upon the property', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-10-21', 'SUCCESSION'),
(6145, 'Re Taplin, Watson v Tate', '', '../links/cases/Re Taplin.pdf', 'Yes', 'Ridsdale & Son., F H Adams., E G Draper', '1937', 'Appeal', 'Re Taplin, Watson v Tate T B lived in Rockhampton from 1860–1870 with a certain lady; they held themselves out to be husband and wife, and they and their children were received in local society, which would not have been the case had there been any suggestion of irregularity.', 'Reginald Townsend Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-05-06', 'SUCCESSION'),
(6146, 'Re Taxation of Costs, Re TAM, A Solicitor', '', '../links/cases/Re Taxation of Costs.pdf', 'Yes', 'L Bingham & Co., T A Matthews', '1937', 'High Court', 'Re Taxation of Costs, Re TAM, A Solicitor The plaintiff in a running-down action was insured against third party risks only. The defendant successfully counterclaimed for damage to his motor vehicle.', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-05-07', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6147, 'Re The Application of the Société des Usines Chimiques Rhône-Poulenc.', '', '../links/cases/Re The Application of the Société des Usines Chimiques Rhône.pdf', 'Yes', 'Seaton Taylor & Co., G B & L Ellis', '1937', 'High Court', 'Re The Application of the Société des Usines Chimiques Rhône-Poulenc. The appellants were the registered owners of the trade mark “Livron.â€ They had in fact made this word up from the words “liverâ€ and “iron.â€ There is, however, and was at the date of registration, a town in France called Livron.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-07-15', 'INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY'),
(6148, 'Re Turkington, Owen v Benson', '', '../links/cases/Re Turkington.pdf', 'Yes', 'Gregory Rowcliffe & Co., F W Davy., Miller & Smiths', '1937', 'Appeal', 'Re Turkington, Owen v Benson A gift to the members of an association which can be disposed of by them as they shall decide is a gift which is not subject to the rule against perpetuities. The gift in the present case being decided to be such a gift, the question whether or not it was a charitable gift does not arise.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-11-19', 'SUCCESSION'),
(6149, 'Re Vardon, Brown v Vardon', '', '../links/cases/Re Vardon.pdf', 'Yes', 'Wordsworth Marr Johnson & Shaw., Gibson & Weldon., Bristo', '1938', 'Appeal', 'Re Vardon, Brown v Vardon A testator by his will made the following gifts: a specific devise, a pecuniary legacy, certain specific bequests of chattels, an annuity to his widow, and certain dispositions which were held to be inoperative. The result was that the executors were left with approximately £9,000 out of which to provide the annuity, the residue going as on an intestacy. The income of that sum was clearly insufficient to provide the annuity.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-07-28', 'SUCCESSION'),
(6150, 'Re Vaux, Nicholson v Vaux', '', '../links/cases/Re Vaux.pdf', 'Yes', 'Patersons Snow & Co', '1938', 'Supreme', 'Re Vaux, Nicholson v Vaux The testator by his will gave the income of his residuary estate unto his widow until death or re-marriage, and after her re-marriage he gave her an annuity of £500 per annum.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-11', 'TRUSTS'),
(6151, 'Re Waterhouse’s Policy', '', '../links/cases/Re Waterhouse.pdf', 'Yes', 'Freshfields Leese & Munns., Walters & Co', '1937', 'High Court', 'Re Waterhouse’s Policy W assigned to a bank, to secure an overdraft, an insurance policy for £500, payable either on his death or on his attaining the age of 60.', 'C M Young Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-03-02', 'INSURANCE'),
(6152, 'Re Waxed Papers Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Re Waxed Papers Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Leonard Tubbs & Co., Nordon & Co', '1937', 'High Court', 'Re Waxed Papers Ltd At a meeting to consider a scheme of arrangement a number of shareholders had appointed proxies “to act for me at the meeting … for the purpose of considering and, if thought fit, approving, with or without modification, the proposed scheme of arrangement … and at such meeting or at any adjournment thereof to vote for me and in my nameâ€ either for or against the scheme.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-03-02', 'COMPANY'),
(6153, 'Re William Porter & Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Re William Porter.pdf', 'Yes', 'Whitehouse Gibson & Oldershaw., Hyman Isaacs Lewis & Mills', '1937', 'High Court', 'Re William Porter & Co Ltd F was the governing director of a limited company. In February 1934, at F’s suggestion, a resolution was passed by the directors that no fees should be paid to the directors from 1 October 1933, until it should be resolved otherwise.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-03-17', 'COMPANY'),
(6154, 'Re Wilson, Wilson v Bland', '', '../links/cases/Re Wilson vrs bland.pdf', 'Yes', 'Warren & Warren., Le Brasseur & Oakley', '1937', 'High Court', 'Re Wilson, Wilson v Bland This case was mentioned on minutes of order, and the court held that the proper order was for a declaration in the terms of that asked for in the motion and which is set out in the opening passage of the judgment of the court delivered by Luxmoore J. The declaration omitted any mention of interest on the debt of £4,200, as all claim to interest had been abandoned by the claimant during the proceedings. The order was to be dated 19 July 1937.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-07-19', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6155, 'Re Winterstoke’s Will Trusts, Gunn v Richardson', '', '../links/cases/Re Winterstoke.pdf', 'Yes', 'Rider Heaton Meredith & Mills., Vassall Abbott & Co.,Gregory Rowcliffe & Co', '1937', 'Appeal', 'Re Winterstoke’s Will Trusts, Gunn v Richardson A testator by his will settled his residuary estate upon trust to pay the income thereof to two ladies during their lives and subject thereto the residue was given to various ascertained persons in certain proportions. One of the tenants for life having died, in order to pay the death duties then payable, the trustees sold certain securities.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-10-14', 'SUCCESSION'),
(6156, 'Read v Croydon Corporation', '', '../links/cases/Read v Croydon Corporation.pdf', 'Yes', 'E Royalton Kisch., Sharpe Pritchard & Co', '1938', 'High Court', 'Read v Croydon Corporation The defendant corporation owned and maintained two water wells, the Addington and Stroud Green wells, for the purpose of supplying water to residents of the borough. The adult plaintiff was a ratepayer in the said borough, and the infant plaintiff, his daughter, resided with him in the house in respect of which he paid the water rate.', 'F Honig Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-12-02', 'ENVIRONMENTAL'),
(6157, 'Rentit Ltd v Duffield', '', '../links/cases/Rentit Ltd v Duffield.pdf', 'Yes', 'H Flint & Co., Reid Sharman & Co', '1937', 'High Court', 'Rentit Ltd v Duffield The respondent company took proceedings to recover certain instalments, amounting to about £6, due under a hire-purchase agreement. In the ordinary course, and under the County Courts (Amendment) Act 1934, s 19, the case came before the registrar. The respondent company was represented and was admittedly a consenting party; the appellant was not represented, but he wrote to the registrar alleging that the contract had been obtained by fraud.', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-05-24', 'ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE'),
(6158, 'A R Dennis & Co Ltd v Campbell', '', '../links/cases/A R Dennis & Co Ltd v Campbell.pdf', 'Yes', 'Howard, Kennedy & Rossi., Oughtred & Co, Edgware', '1976', 'Appeal', 'A R Dennis & Co Ltd v Campbell The plaintiffs employed the defendant as manager of one of their betting shops. Contrary to the\r\nplaintiffs’ rules, and without authority, the defendant accepted credit bets from a customer totalling\r\n£1,000.', 'Janet Harding Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-03-29', 'LEISURE AND LICENSING'),
(6159, 'A R Dennis & Co Ltd v Campbell', '', '../links/cases/A R Dennis & Co Ltd v Campbell.pdf', 'Yes', 'Howard, Kennedy & Rossi., Oughtred & Co, Edgware', '1976', 'Appeal', 'A R Dennis & Co Ltd v Campbell The plaintiffs employed the defendant as manager of one of their betting shops. Contrary to the\r\nplaintiffs’ rules, and without authority, the defendant accepted credit bets from a customer totalling\r\n£1,000.', 'Janet Harding Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-03-29', 'LEISURE AND LICENSING'),
(6160, 'Rhokana Corporation Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners', '', '../links/cases/Rhokana Corporation Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners.pdf', 'Yes', 'Solicitor of Inland Revenue., Holmes Son & Pott', '1937', 'High Court', 'Rhokana Corporation Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners A company issued certain debentures secured by a trust deed, which provided, inter alia, that interest declared at sterling rates should be paid in sterling at the company’s bankers in London, or at certain offices in New York in USA dollars at the fixed rate of exchange of 4.86 dollars to the £, or at certain offices in Amsterdam, in Dutch florins at the fixed rate of exchange of 12.11 Dutch florins to the £. The deed further provided that interest on registered debentures would be paid by cheque or warrant on the company’s bankers sent through the post.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-03-04', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6161, 'Amies v Inner London Education Authority', '', '../links/cases/Amies v Inner London Education Authority.pdf', 'Yes', 'Howard, Kennedy & Rossi., Oughtred & Co, Edgware', '1976', 'Supreme', 'Amies v Inner London Education Authority In 1971 Mrs A was appointed by a local education authority as deputy head of a school art department.\r\nIn 1975 she applied for the post of head of the department but, on 13 October 1975, a man was\r\nappointed to that post.', 'Salim H J Merali Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-12-02', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6162, 'Amies v Inner London Education Authority', '', '../links/cases/Amies v Inner London Education Authority.pdf', 'Yes', 'Howard, Kennedy & Rossi., Oughtred & Co, Edgware', '1976', 'Supreme', 'Amies v Inner London Education Authority In 1971 Mrs A was appointed by a local education authority as deputy head of a school art department.\r\nIn 1975 she applied for the post of head of the department but, on 13 October 1975, a man was\r\nappointed to that post.', 'Salim H J Merali Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-12-02', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6163, 'Ritz Cleaners Ltd v West Middlesex Assessment Committee', '', '../links/cases/Ritz Cleaners Ltd v West Middlesex Assessment Committee.pdf', 'Yes', 'H G Greenwood., Ellis & Fairbairn', '1937', 'High Court', 'Ritz Cleaners Ltd v West Middlesex Assessment Committee The respondent company used certain premises for cleaning and repairing garments left for cleaning, and, to a very small extent, for dyeing. Articles for cleaning were brought to the premises by customers and the respondent company’s vanman, who collected them from two receiving-offices, from an agency, and from customers’ houses, in response to orders received.', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-03-22', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6164, 'Roast v Roast', '', '../links/cases/Roast v Roast.pdf', 'Yes', 'Edward Fail., C V Young & Cowper', '1937', 'High Court', 'Roast v Roast A wife had for some time before August 1936, been living apart from her husband. About that time she returned to him, the date of such return being stated by the wife to be 28 August, and by the husband to be 18 September.', 'J F Compton Miller Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-11-04', 'FAMILY'),
(6165, 'Ansah v Ansah', '', '../links/cases/Ansah v Ansah.pdf', 'Yes', 'Wells & Coggins., Foster., Camberley', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Ansah v Ansah The parties were married in 1973 and had two children. The marriage was stormy. The wife finally left\r\nthe husband on 7 April 1976.', 'L I Zysman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-12-13', 'FAMILY'),
(6166, 'Robinson Brothers (Brewers) Ltd v Houghton and Chester-le-Street Assessment Committee', '', '../links/cases/Robinson Brothers.pdf', 'Yes', 'Richardson Sadler & Co., Godden Holme & Ward', '1937', 'High Court', 'Robinson Brothers (Brewers) Ltd v Houghton and Chester-le-Street Assessment Committee A firm of brewers, following the usual custom at the present time instead of letting a public house to a tenant, put a manager in charge of it. The house was in effect a tied house, and it was admitted that brewers were prepared to pay a higher rent for houses in which a manager could be placed in this way.', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-03-23', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6167, 'Aries Tanker Corporation v Total Transport Ltd', '', '', 'Yes', '', '1977', 'Supreme', 'Aries Tanker Corporation v Total Transport Ltd By a voyage charterparty, expressed to be governed by English law, the owners’ vessel was chartered for\r\nthe carriage of a cargo of goods to Rotterdam.', '', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1977-01-27', 'SHIPIN'),
(6168, 'Ronald Bampton & Partners v D Garner & Sons Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Ronald Bampton vrs d garner n sons.pdf', 'Yes', 'Lionel Lazarus & Leighton., Warmingtons', '1937', 'High Court', 'Ronald Bampton & Partners v D Garner & Sons Ltd An agent for the sale of 3 shops in course of erection by builders secured an agreement for the purchase of the same upon certain terms agreed to by the builders who were in fact the vendors. When the agreement was mentioned to the solicitor for the persons financing the builders, he refused to allow the sale to go on, upon the ground that it was completely one-sided and too advantageous to the buyer. The builders then refused to go on with the sale and the agent sued for his commission.', 'Gerald Abrahams Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-05-27', 'LAND '),
(6169, 'Aries Tanker Corporation v Total Transport Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Aries Tanker Corporation v Total Transport Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Denton, Hall & Burgin., Coward Chance', '1977', 'Appeal', 'Aries Tanker Corporation v Total Transport Ltd  By a voyage charterparty, expressed to be governed by English law, the owners’ vessel was chartered for\r\nthe carriage of a cargo of goods to Rotterdam.', 'Mary Rose Plummer Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1977-01-27', 'SHIPPING'),
(6170, 'Armadora Occidental SA v Horace Mann Insurance Company', '', '../links/cases/Armadora Occidental SA v Horace Mann Insurance Company.pdf', 'Yes', 'Ince & Co', '1976', 'High Court', 'Armadora Occidental SA v Horace Mann Insurance Company The defendants, a company incorporated in the United States and resident there, were part insurers of\r\nthe plaintiffs’ vessels against loss. The rest of the cover was provided by various insurers including\r\nLloyd’s and other London insurers.', 'K Mydeen Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-18', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6171, 'Rowell v Pratt', '', '../links/cases/Rowell v Pratt.pdf', 'Yes', 'Metcalfe Copeman & Pettefar., Burton Yeates & Hart', '1937', 'High Court', 'Rowell v Pratt The appellant brought an action against the respondent to recover the price of certain potatoes sold and delivered to the respondent. The respondent counterclaimed damages, on the ground that the appellant had agreed to grow 9½ acres of royal kidney potatoes, and to deliver the whole crop to the respondent at a fixed price, but that, in breach of his contract, the appellant had not delivered to the respondent the whole product of the 9½ acres, but had wrongfully sold part thereof to other buyers, at a price higher than that at which he had contracted to sell to the respondent.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-07-26', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6172, 'Arnold v Dodd and others', '', '../links/cases/Arnold v Dodd and others.pdf', 'Yes', 'Stollard & Limbrey., Kent & Hodges., Littlehampton., James Weeks', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Arnold v Dodd and others Under the Commons Registration Act 1965 the whole of Yateley Common was registered as common\r\nland. The common was divided into four parts of which one was the ‘Blackbushe part’.', 'Jacqueline Metcalfe Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-06', 'LAND'),
(6173, 'Savage v Nightingale', '', '../links/cases/Savage v Nightingale.pdf', 'Yes', 'C Howe Browne., Ponsford & Devenish', '1937', 'High Court', 'Savage v Nightingale From June 1935, the appellant was working for H K & F Ltd. In March 1936, he developed a rash, but continued in that employment at full wages until 2 May, when he began to work for the respondent. He worked for the respondent until 9 May, when he felt too ill to continue.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-04-30', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6174, 'Arsenal Football Club Ltd and another v Ende', '', '../links/cases/Arsenal Football Club Ltd and another v Ende.pdf', 'Yes', 'Lawrence Jones & Co', '1976', 'High Court', 'Arsenal Football Club Ltd and another v Ende The appellant was a ratepayer who lived in the London Borough of Hackney. He was also the managing\r\nagent of a house in the London Borough of Islington which was in multiple occupation.', 'G Gore-Andrews Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-07-30', 'LOCAL GOVERNMENT'),
(6175, 'Scheff v Columbia Pictures Corporation Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Scheff v Columbia Pictures Corporation Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'H S Wright & Webb., Oscar Mason Co', '1938', 'Supreme', 'Scheff v Columbia Pictures Corporation Ltd The plaintiff complained that the defendants had infringed the copyright in a book he had written. Correspondence took place between the parties from 12 October 1937, up to 8 November 1937, on which date the defendants gave an undertaking to keep accounts, on the understanding that the plaintiff would not ask for an injunction.', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-04', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6176, 'Arsenal Football Club Ltd v Smith (Valuation Officer) and another', '', '../links/cases/Arsenal Football Club Ltd v Smith.pdf', 'Yes', 'Lawrence Jones & Co', '1977', 'High Court', 'Arsenal Football Club Ltd v Smith (Valuation Officer) and another       E lived in a flat in the London Borough of Hackney and was liable to the rates in respect of the flat. He\r\nwas also the managing agent of a house in the London Borough of Islington which was in multiple\r\noccupation, in the sense that it had been divided into four dwellings for separate occupation.', 'Mary Rose Plummer Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '0000-00-00', 'LOCAL GOVERNMENT'),
(6177, 'Bale v Rosier', '', '../links/cases/Bale v Rosier.pdf', 'Yes', 'Sharpe, Pritchard & Co., J V Bates, Norwich', '1976', 'Supreme', 'Bale v Rosier On two occasions the defendant obtained board and lodgings from two landladies without paying for\r\nthem. Two charges were preferred against him, each alleging that contrary to s 16(1)a of the Theft Act\r\n1968 he had, by deception, dishonestly obtained for himself a pecuniary advantage, namely ‘the evasion\r\nor deferment of a debt’ of a specified sum for board and lodging from, in each case, a named landlady\r\nfor which he was liable.', 'Jacqueline Metcalfe Barrister', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-02', 'CRIMINAL'),
(6178, 'Scindia Steamships (London) Ltd v London Assurance', '', '../links/cases/Scindia Steamships.pdf', 'Yes', 'Holman Fenwick & Willan., Thomas Cooper & Co', '1936', 'High Court', 'Scindia Steamships (London) Ltd v London Assurance The owners of a ship took out a Lloyd’s policy of insurance which contained a clause, known as the Inchmaree clause, in the following terms: “This insurance also specially to cover (subject to the free of average warranty) loss of or damage to hull or machinery directly caused by accidents in loading, discharging, or handling cargo, or in bunkering or in taking in fuel, or caused through the negligence of master, mariners, engineers or pilots, or through explosions, bursting of boilers, breakage of shafts, or through any latent defect in the machinery or hull.', 'Reginald Townsend Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1936-12-16', 'SHIPPING'),
(6179, 'Balen v Inland Revenue Commissioners', '', '../links/cases/Balen v Inland Revenue Commissioners.pdf', 'Yes', 'Tarlo, Lyons & Aukin', '1976', 'High Court', 'Balen v Inland Revenue Commissioners In April 1974 the Inland Revenue Commissioners, acting under s 460(6)a of the Income and Corporation\r\nTaxes Act 1970, notified the plaintiff that they had reason to believe that s 460 might apply to him in\r\nrespect of certain transactions in securities specified in the notification.', 'Evelyn Budd Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-11', 'TAXATION'),
(6180, 'Barclays Bank International Ltd v Levin Bros (Bradford) Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Barclays Bank International Ltd v Levin Bros (Bradford) Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Kaufman, Kramer & Shebson., Victor D Zermansky & Co, Leeds', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Barclays Bank International Ltd v Levin Bros (Bradford) Ltd In 1975 G Co, a New York corporation, sold cloth to the defendants, who carried on business in\r\nBradford. On 25 April 1975 G Co drew four bills of exchange on the defendants, each for US $23,000,\r\nwhich were payable on 21 June, 5 July, 19 July and 2 August 1975.', 'H S Narulla Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-07-12', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6181, 'Scophony Ltd v Traub and Others', '', '../links/cases/Scophony Ltd v Traub and Others.pdf', 'Yes', 'Albert Fletcher & Co., Hill Dickinson & Co', '1937', 'High Court', 'Scophony Ltd v Traub and Others The manager of the defendant companies endeavoured by dishonest means to procure for his companies information to which they had no right whatever.', 'Reginald Townsend Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-10-29', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6182, 'Bickel and others v Duke of Westminster and others', '', '../links/cases/Bickel and others v Duke of Westminster and others.pdf', 'Yes', 'Boodle Hatfield & Co., Whittington, Tilling & Knight', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Bickel and others v Duke of Westminster and others A body of trustees were the lessees of several houses on a large estate. The leases, which had been\r\ngranted in 1947, were long leases at low rents within the Leasehold Reform Act 1967, but the lessees\r\nheld them only as investments and did not occupy any of the houses.', 'Wendy Shockett Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-07-08', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6183, 'Biggin and another v Minton', '', '../links/cases/Biggin and another v Minton.pdf', 'Yes', 'Furley, Page, Fielding & Pembrook', '1976', 'Supreme', 'Biggin and another v Minton The vendors of property obtained against the purchaser an order for specific performance of the\r\ncontract of sale. The purchaser failed to carry out the order for specific performance and the vendors\r\napplied for an order that in lieu of specific performance they were entitled to damages under the\r\njurisdiction conferred by s 2a of the Chancery Amendment Act 1858.', 'Jacqueline Metcalfe Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-26', 'LAND'),
(6184, 'Shacklock v Ethorpe Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Shacklock v Ethorpe Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Vickress & Clare., Berrymans', '1937', 'High Court', 'Shacklock v Ethorpe Ltd An innkeeper is required by the Innkeepers’ Liability Act 1863, s 3, to exhibit a copy of s 1 thereof in a conspicuous part of the hall or entrance to the inn.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-11-29', 'LEISURE AND LICENSING'),
(6185, 'Biggs v Biggs and Wheatley', '', '../links/cases/Biggs v Biggs and Wheatley.pdf', 'Yes', 'Armstrong & Co', '1976', 'Supreme', 'Biggs v Biggs and Wheatley The husband and the wife married in 1959. In January 1972, the husband was convicted of assault on a\r\nthird party and sentenced to five years’ imprisonment. In January 1973 the wife petitioned for divorce\r\nunder s 1(2)(a)a of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, alleging that the husband had committed adultery.\r\nA decree nisi was pronounced in October 1973.', 'Georgina Chambers Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-01-29', 'FAMILY'),
(6186, 'Blue Circle Staff Association v Certification Officer', '', '../links/cases/Blue Circle Staff Association v Certification Officer.pdf', 'Yes', 'Lawrence Jones & Co', '1976', 'High Court', 'Blue Circle Staff Association v Certification Officer In 1971 the salaried staff, numbering about 4,000 employees, of a group of companies (‘the employers’)\r\nformed with the employers’ assistance a staff consultative organisation (‘the association’). The function\r\nof the association was to provide the employers with a body which it could consult on staff matters and\r\ncould inform on matters affecting the group.', 'Salim H J Merali Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-12-02', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6187, 'Shenton v Tyler', '', '../links/cases/Shenton v Tyler.pdf', 'Yes', 'John B Borer., Robinson & Bradley', '1938', 'High Court', 'Shenton v Tyler The plaintiff sought to administer certain interrogatories to the defendant in order to establish that the defendant’s late husband had created a secret trust in her, the plaintiff''s, favour.', 'F Honig Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-22', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6188, 'BP Exploration Co (Libya) Ltd v Hunt', '', '../links/cases/BP Exploration Co (Libya) Ltd v Hunt.pdf', 'Yes', 'Franks, Charlesley & Co., Linklaters & Paines', '1975', 'Supreme', 'BP Exploration Co (Libya) Ltd v Hunt The defendant was granted a concession by the Libyan government for the search and exploitation of\r\noil. In June 1960 he concluded an agreement, signed in London, with the plaintiffs, a company registered\r\nin England, with the consent of the Libyan authorities, for the development and joint exploitation of that\r\nconcession, which entitled the plaintiffs to one-half of the beneficial interest.', 'Sumra Green Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1975-11-04', 'CONTRACT'),
(6189, 'Brintons Ltd v Wyre Forest District Council', '', '../links/cases/Brintons Ltd v Wyre Forest District Council.pdf', 'Yes', 'Wedlake, Bell & Co., Sharpe Pritchard & Co', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Brintons Ltd v Wyre Forest District Council The plaintiffs withheld rates of £83,000 properly demanded in respect of office premises. On the rating\r\nauthority’s application, justices issued a distress warrant in respect of the rates. On the same day the\r\nbailiff went to the plaintiffs’ premises to levy distress.', 'Christine Ivamy Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-04-12', 'LOCAL GOVERNMENT'),
(6190, 'Shipman v Shipman', '', '../links/cases/Shipman v Shipman.pdf', 'Yes', 'Bell Brodrick & Gray., Burton Yeates & Hart', '1938', 'High Court', 'Shipman v Shipman The respondent wife was first certified on 31 July 1915, and remained continuously in the asylum until 3 October 1923, when she was provisionally released on trial until further order or relapse.', 'J F Compton Miller Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-12-09', 'FAMILY'),
(6191, 'Bristol Channel Ship Repairers Ltd v O’Keefe and others', '', '../links/cases/Bristol Channel Ship Repairers Ltd v O.pdf', 'Yes', 'Le Brasseur, Davis and Son, Newport., Pattinson and Brewer', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Bristol Channel Ship Repairers Ltd v O’Keefe and others Because of lack of work it became necessary for the employers to dismiss 35 employees. Thirteen of\r\nthose employees (‘the applicants’) claimed that they had been unfairly dismissed and applied to an\r\nindustrial tribunal for compensation.', 'Salim H J Merali Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-12-15', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6192, 'British Airports Authority v Customs and Excise Commissioners', '', '../links/cases/British Airports Authority v Customs and Excise Commissioners.pdf', 'Yes', 'M W T Nott', '1976', 'Supreme', 'British Airports Authority v Customs and Excise Commissioners The authority was responsible for the administration of an airport. One of its duties was to provide\r\nshops at the airport. The authority entered into an agreement with a firm (‘Hills’) whereby (cl 1) Hills\r\nwere granted the right to display and sell merchandise of a quality approved by the authority at shop\r\npremises in the airport.', 'Mary Rose Plummer Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-04', 'TAXATION'),
(6193, 'Cadogan v Cadogan', '', '../links/cases/Cadogan v Cadogan.pdf', 'Yes', 'Gwyn James & Co, Lydney, Gloucestershire., Mayo & Perkins, Eastbourne', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Cadogan v Cadogan In 1947 the plaintiff and her husband purchased a property as their matrimonial home. The property\r\nwas conveyed into the husband’s sole name although the plaintiff had contributed toward the purchase\r\nprice.', 'Jacqueline Metcalfe Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-06-21', 'LAND'),
(6194, 'Simons v Simons', '', '../links/cases/Simons v Simons.pdf', 'Yes', 'Torr & Co., Attenboroughs', '1938', 'High Court', 'Simons v Simons The plaintiff and her husband and their four children lived in Cornwall until 1912, when the husband went to Boston, USA, leaving the wife and children in this country. He returned to England in 1914, but went to America again in 1916.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-09', 'CONFLICT OF LAWS '),
(6195, 'Campbell v Campbell', '', '../links/cases/Campbell v Campbell.pdf', 'Yes', 'Donald, Darlington and Nice., Curwen, Jessopp and James', '1976', 'High Court', 'Campbell v Campbell In 1961 C, who was aged 17, began committing adultery with Mrs H, a married woman aged 30 with\r\neight children, most of whom were in care. C then went to live with Mrs H whose husband was away\r\nfrom home for considerable periods.', 'Georgina Chambers Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-01-23', 'FAMILY'),
(6196, 'Sitwell v Sun Engraving Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Sitwell v Sun Engraving Co Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Frere Cholmeley & Co., Rhys Roberts & Co', '1937', 'High Court', 'Sitwell v Sun Engraving Co Ltd The plaintiff sued a printing and publishing company for infringement of copyright by printing six stanzas of a poem of which he was the author.', 'Reginald Townsend Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-11-15', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6197, 'Campden Hill Towers Ltd and another v Gardner and another', '', '../links/cases/Campden Hill Towers Ltd and another v Gardner and another.pdf', 'Yes', 'Thornton, Lynne & Lawson., Allen & Son', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Campden Hill Towers Ltd and another v Gardner and another what had been included in the demise; ‘the exterior’ of the flat therefore included the outside walls of\r\nthe flat (although they had been excluded from the demise), the outside of the inner party walls of the\r\nflat, the outer sides of horizontal divisions between the demised flat and the flats above and below it,\r\nand the structural framework and beams which directly supported the floors, ceiling and walls of the flat', 'Mary Rose Plummer Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-24', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6198, 'Smith Hogg & Co Ltd v Black Sea & Baltic General Insurance Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Smith Hogg.pdf', 'Yes', 'Sinclair Roche & Temperley., Ince Roscoe Wilson & Glover', '1938', 'Supreme', 'Smith Hogg & Co Ltd v Black Sea & Baltic General Insurance Co Ltd The plaintiffs were the owners of a ship chartered to go to Soroka and load timber and carry it to Garston.', 'Maurice Share Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-08', 'SHIPPING'),
(6199, 'Capper Pass Ltd v Lawton', '', '../links/cases/Capper Pass Ltd v Lawton.pdf', 'Yes', 'Pattinson & Brewer., J S Bradley', '1976', 'High Court', 'Capper Pass Ltd v Lawton Mrs L was employed as a cook. She worked in a kitchen from which the directors of the company by\r\nwhom she was employed, and their guests, were served. She was the only cook in that kitchen, which\r\nwas of a semi-domestic sort, and she had to provide lunch for between ten and 20 persons a day.', 'Salim H J Merali Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-10-19', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6200, 'Smith v Birkenhead Corporation', '', '../links/cases/Smith v Birkenhead Corporation.pdf', 'Yes', 'Bartley Cocks & Bird., F Venn & Co', '1937', 'Supreme', 'Smith v Birkenhead Corporation By the Birkenhead Improvement Act 1884, Sched II, it is provided that, when certain works for the improvement of private streets are undertaken by the corporation, the estimated expenses of executing the works shall be provisionally apportioned among the premises fronting or adjoining or abutting on such street, and that the provisional apportionment “shall also state whether the apportionment is made according to the frontage of the respective premises, or not, and the measurements of the frontages and the other considerations (if any) on which the apportionment is based.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-10-14', 'ENVIRONMENTAL'),
(6201, 'China National Foreign Trade Transportation Corporation v Evlogia Shipping Co Sa of Panama', '', '../links/cases/China National Foreign Trade Transportation.pdf', 'Yes', 'Richards, Butler & Co., Holman, Fenwick and Willau', '1976', 'Appeal', 'China National Foreign Trade Transportation Corporation v Evlogia Shipping Co Sa of Panama By a Baltime form charterparty the charterers hired a vessel for a period of eight to ten months. Clause 6\r\nof the charterparty provided that the owners had the right to withdraw the vessel from the service of\r\nthe charterers in ‘default of payment’.', 'H S Narulla Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-07-02', 'CONTRACT'),
(6202, 'Clyde & Co v The Secretary of State for the Environment and another', '', '../links/cases/Clyde.pdf', 'Yes', 'Wedlake, Bell', '1976', 'Commercial Cour', 'Clyde & Co v The Secretary of State for the Environment and another In 1972 the local planning authority granted permission for the erection of a building in Guildford. Under\r\nthe permission the building was to comprise, in the western half, offices and, in the eastern half, eight\r\nflats with garages.', 'K Mydeen Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-10-19', 'TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING'),
(6203, 'Smith v Pearl Assurance Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Smith v Pearl Assurance Co Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Pennington & Son., Berrymans', '1939', 'High Court', 'Smith v Pearl Assurance Co Ltd The plaintiff was injured in a motor car accident owing to the negligence of B, and recovered judgment against him.', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-11', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6204, 'South Suburban Co-operative Society Ltd v Orum and Croydon Advertiser Ltd', '', '../links/cases/South Suburban Co.pdf', 'Yes', 'Shaen Roscoe Massey & Co., Haslewood Hare & Co', '1937', 'Supreme', 'South Suburban Co-operative Society Ltd v Orum and Croydon Advertiser Ltd In the absence of special circumstances, a newspaper will not be forced to discover the names of its informants, but the rule cannot be extended to the contributors to newspapers, who must answer an interrogatory directed to elicit such information. Such interrogatories are, of course, relevant upon the question of malice.', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-05-31', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6205, 'Commercial Union Assurance Co Ltd v Hayden', '', '../links/cases/Commercial Union Assurance Co Ltd v Hayden.pdf', 'Yes', 'Herbert Smith & Co., Reynolds, Porter Chamberlain & Co', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Commercial Union Assurance Co Ltd v Hayden The plaintiffs, Commercial Union Assurance Co Ltd (‘Commercial Union’) appealed against a judgment of\r\nDonaldson J, given in the Commercial Court on 28 July 1975, dismissing their action against the\r\ndefendant, Mr Nicholas Charles Hayden who was sued on behalf of himself and as representing all the\r\nunderwriters subscribing to a public liability insurance policy issued by Lloyd’s. Both parties had insured\r\nagainst the same risk.', 'A S Virdi Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-10-22', 'INSURANCE'),
(6206, 'Spence v Spence', '', '../links/cases/Spence v Spence.pdf', 'Yes', 'Preston Lane—Claypon & O’Kelly., Arthur Benjamin & Cohen', '1938', 'High Court', 'Spence v Spence The parties were married for the first time in July 1913, the wife being then under 21 years of age and 28 years younger than her husband.', 'J F Compton Miller Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-12-19', 'FAMILY'),
(6207, 'Spilsbury (Inspector of Taxes) v Spofforth', '', '../links/cases/Spilsbury.pdf', 'Yes', 'Solicitor of Inland Revenue., Winter & Co', '1937', 'High Court', 'Spilsbury (Inspector of Taxes) v Spofforth The respondent obtained a decree absolute of divorce and an order for the payment of maintenance free of tax. At the end of the tax year she obtained a certificate that tax had been deducted and claimed repayment of the tax.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-06-15', 'FAMILY'),
(6208, 'Spittle v Thames Grit & Aggregates Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Spittle v Thames Grit.pdf', 'Yes', 'Treasury Solicitor., William Charles Crocker', '1937', 'Supreme', 'Spittle v Thames Grit & Aggregates Ltd The respondents, as holders of a private “Câ€ carrier’s licence, were charged with having failed to comply with a condition attached to the licence, namely, that “the holder of this licence is entitled to use the authorised vehicles for the carriage of goods for or in connection with any trade or business carried on by him, but no vehicle which is for the time being an authorised vehicle shall be used for the carriage of goods for hire or reward,â€ contrary to the Road and Rail Traffic Act 1933, s 9(1).', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-10-20', 'CRIMINAL LAW '),
(6209, 'Srimati Premila Devi v Peoples Bank of Northern India Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Srimati Premila Devi v Peoples Bank of Northern India Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Hy S L Polak & Co., Cardew Smith & Ross', '1938', 'Supreme', 'Srimati Premila Devi v Peoples Bank of Northern India Ltd The respondent bank was incorporated in 1925 with a capital of 50 lacs of rupees divided into 50,000 shares of Rs100 each.', 'T A Dillon Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-10-17', 'COMMONWEALTH'),
(6210, 'Covell Matthews & Partners v French Wools Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Covell Matthews.pdf', 'Yes', 'May, May & Merrimans., Theodore Goddard & Co', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Covell Matthews & Partners v French Wools Ltd On 13 March 1973 the tenants issued an originating summons applying for an order for the grant of a\r\nnew tenancy of business premises under s 24 of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954. Negotiations\r\nbetween the parties as to the terms and conditions of the new tenancy took place and the hearing of\r\nthe originating summons was postponed from time to time.', 'Evelyn M C Budd Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-01', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6211, 'St Pierre and Others v South American Stores (Gath & Chaves) Ltd and Chilean Stores (Gath & Chaves) Ltd', '', '../links/cases/St Pierre and Others v South American Stores.pdf', 'Yes', 'Vizard Oldham Crowder & Cash., Berrymans', '1937', 'Supreme', 'St Pierre and Others v South American Stores (Gath & Chaves) Ltd and Chilean Stores (Gath & Chaves) Ltd The plaintiffs, successors of the owner of premises in Santiago de Chile, by a lease executed at the Chilean consulate in Paris and drawn in the Spanish language, let the premises to the Chilean Stores for a term of 10 years from 1935, at a rental of 93,500 pesos of 183,057 millionths of a gramme of fine gold monthly, to be paid at the option of the owner either in Santiago de Chile or remitted to Europe, according to the instructions which the owner might give, one month in advance on the first working day of each month.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-06-17', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6212, 'Cummings v Granger', '', '../links/cases/Cummings v Granger (sued as Grainger).pdf', 'Yes', 'Lewis Silkin & Partners., Alton Batchelor', '1976', 'District Court', 'Cummings v Granger The defendant occupied a yard in the East End of London which he used for storing scrap metal sold to\r\ncustomers who came to the yard. The yard was surrounded by high walls and a fence in which there\r\nwere two gates.', 'Wendy Shockett Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-05-26', 'ANIMAL'),
(6213, 'Currie and Co v The Law Society', '', '../links/cases/Currie and Co v The Law Society.pdf', 'Yes', 'Currie & Co, Wolverhampton., Hempsons', '1976', 'Supreme', 'Currie and Co v The Law Society In June 1970 the wife was granted a civil aid certificate to take proceedings against the husband in\r\nrespect of the former matrimonial home and other property. The plaintiffs were the husband’s\r\nsolicitors.', 'H Singh Narulla Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-03-22', 'ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE'),
(6214, 'Customs and Excise Commissioners v Tan and another', '', '../links/cases/Customs and Excise Commissioners v Tan and another.pdf', 'Yes', 'David Lee & Co., G Krikorian', '1977', 'High Court', 'Customs and Excise Commissioners v Tan and another In April 1972 T and her husband purchased in China two jade pendants for the total sum of £8,300. In\r\nMay T arrived at London (Heathrow) Airport where she declared the pendants to a customs officer. The\r\nofficer asked her what the pendants were worth; she replied that she did not know.', 'Mary Rose Plummer Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1977-01-27', 'TAXATION'),
(6215, 'Stepney Corporation v Osofsky', '', '../links/cases/Stepney Corporation v Osofsky.pdf', 'Yes', 'T Myrddin Baker., Stewart-Wallace & Co', '1937', 'Supreme', 'Stepney Corporation v Osofsky On 17 September 1935, a certain sum was owing by the respondent, a licensed street trader, to the appellant corporation, in respect of removal of refuse and other services. During the period from 18 September 1935 to 17 March 1936, further sums became due for similar services, and, during the same period, certain payments were made by the respondent to the appellant corporation. The respondent did not specifically appropriate any of these payments to any particular charges.', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-06-08', 'CONTRACT'),
(6216, 'Stockwell v Southgate Corporation', '', '../links/cases/Stockwell v Southgate Corporation.pdf', 'Yes', 'Beveridge & Co., Golding Hargrove & Golding', '1937', 'Supreme', 'Stockwell v Southgate Corporation The Coal Mines Act 1911, s 2(4) prohibits mine-owners from taking any part in the technical management of the mine unless they have the requisite technical knowledge which will qualify them to be managers. The duty of mine-owners to secure a proper system of working the mine is not thereby reduced to the mere duty to appoint a properly qualified manager.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-07-14', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6217, 'Strood Estates Co Ltd v Gregory', '', '../links/cases/Strood Estates Co Ltd v Gregory.pdf', 'Yes', 'Simon Haynes Barlas & Ireland., W H Thompson', '1937', 'Supreme', 'Strood Estates Co Ltd v Gregory A landlord of controlled premises paid the rates and received a compounding allowance from the local authority. In calculating the net rent, he claimed to deduct from the standard rent only the amount of the rates he actually paid and not the amount with which the occupier would have been charged if he had been rated directly.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-07-26', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6218, 'Studebaker Distributors Ltd v Charlton Steam Shipping Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Studebaker Distributors Ltd v Charlton Steam Shipping Co Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Ince Roscoe Wilson & Glover., Lightbounds Jones & Co', '1937', 'High Court', 'Studebaker Distributors Ltd v Charlton Steam Shipping Co LtdA bill of lading, entered into in the United States of America, and therefore required by the law of that country to be expressed to be subject to all the terms and conditions of the Harter Act, provided for the loading of the ship under the inspection of a surveyor of the Board of Underwriters of New York, and the receipt of a certificate in the usual form, certifying that the vessel had conformed to the rules of that Board', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-11-03', 'SHIPPING'),
(6219, 'Sutherland Publishing Co Ltd v Caxton Publishing Co Ltd (No 2)', '', '../links/cases/Sutherland Publishing Co Ltd v Caxton Publishing Co Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'White & Leonard & Nicholls & Co., Oswald Hickson Collier & Co', '1937', 'High Court', 'Sutherland Publishing Co Ltd v Caxton Publishing Co Ltd (No 2) In an action for an alleged infringement of the plaintiffs’ copyright in a certain publication, the plaintiffs claimed, inter alia, an inquiry as to (i) damages suffered by reason of the infringement, and (ii) damages for conversion. The defendants admitted the infringement and submitted to an inquiry as to what damages the plaintiffs had suffered, but they relied upon the Copyright Act 1911, s 10, and the Statute of Limitations in answer to the plaintiffs’ claim.', 'Reginald Townsend Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-11-15', 'INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY'),
(6220, 'Tata Hydro-Electric Agencies Ltd (Bombay) v Income Tax Commissioner, Bombay Presidency and Aden', '', '../links/cases/Tata Hydro.pdf', 'Yes', 'Stanley Johnson & Allen., The Solicitor India Office', '1937', 'Supreme', 'Tata Hydro-Electric Agencies Ltd (Bombay) v Income Tax Commissioner, Bombay Presidency and Aden The appellant company carried on business as managing agent of various electric supply companies, including the Tata Power Co Ltd, having by an assignment, dated 21 November 1929, succeeded to this agency formerly held by Tata Sons Ltd, subject to certain obligations.', 'T A Dillon Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-03-12', 'COMPANY'),
(6221, 'Tate v Tate', '', '../links/cases/Tate v Tate.pdf', 'Yes', 'Kenneth Brown Baker Baker', '1938', 'Supreme', 'Tate v Tate In April 1931, the respondent, the husband, treated the petitioner in such a way as to terrify her, and she went back to her mother.', 'J F Compton Miller Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-04', 'FAMILY');
INSERT INTO `courtrulings` (`id`, `title`, `content`, `link`, `isshow`, `author`, `date`, `courttype`, `summary`, `presiding`, `casetype`, `subjectmatter`, `caseno`, `counsel1`, `counsel2`, `courtname`, `caseDate`, `subjectmattertitle`) VALUES
(6222, 'Taylor v Taylor', '', '../links/cases/Taylor v Taylor.pdf', 'Yes', 'Montagu’s & Cox & Cardale., Jacques Asquith & Jacques', '1937', 'High Court', 'Taylor v Taylor In an action by a wife for the recovery of money alleged to be due to her under a separation agreement, the husband contended that the aggregate of the payments made exceeded the amount payable under the agreement after income tax, which he was entitled to deduct, had been deducted, and that he had, therefore, overpaid his wife, and that nothing was due to her.', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-07-12', 'FAMILY'),
(6223, 'Terrene Ltd v Nelson', '', '../links/cases/Terrene Ltd v Nelson.pdf', 'Yes', 'Marshall & Hicks Beach., Turner & Co', '1937', 'High Court', 'Terrene Ltd v Nelson In the particulars of an estate supplied to an intending purchaser, it was stated that the estate included inter alia an inn and farm let at a rent of £193. The vendor intimated that he had had an offer of £250 a year, but had been unwilling to disturb the tenant.', 'Reginald Townsend Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-07-15', 'LAND '),
(6224, 'The Arantzazu Mendi', '', '../links/cases/The Arantzazu Mendi.pdf', 'Yes', 'Petch & Co., H A Crowe & Co', '1938', 'High Court', 'The Arantzazu Mendi The ship Arantzazu Mendi, described as of the port of Bilbao, arrived at London on 11 August 1937. On 19 June 1937, Bilbao had been captured by General Franco’s forces, and on 28 June 1937, the ship was requisitioned by a decree of the Spanish Republican Government of that date. On 24 August 1937, the owners issued a writ in rem for the possession of the ship, and she was arrested.', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-01', 'SHIPPING'),
(6225, 'The “Kafiristanâ€', '', '../links/cases/The kafrista.pdf', 'Yes', 'William A Crump & Son., Middleton Lewis & Clarke', '1937', 'High Court', 'The “Kafiristanâ€ The “Empress of Britainâ€ collided with the “Kafiristan,â€ blame being apportioned by agreement as to three-quarters to the “Empress of Britainâ€ and one-quarter to the “Kafiristan.â€ The “Kafiristanâ€ was badly damaged, and salvage assistance was rendered by the “Beaverford.â€', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-07-28', 'SHIPPING'),
(6226, 'The Nordborg, Nordborg (Owners) v C P Sherwood & Co', '', '../links/cases/The Nordborg vrs C P sherwood & Co.pdf', 'Yes', 'Pritchard Sons Partington & Holland .,Botterell & Roche', '1938', 'High Court', 'The Nordborg, Nordborg (Owners) v C P Sherwood & Co The defendants were the holders of 12 bills of lading under which they took delivery of a quantity of sawn timber borne in the plaintiff’s vessel.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-12', 'SHIPPING'),
(6227, 'The “Strannaâ€', '', '../links/cases/The stanna.pdf', 'Yes', 'Waltons & Co., William A Crump & Son', '1937', 'High Court', 'The “Strannaâ€ The “Strannaâ€ was loading from boats a deck cargo of timber to be carried “at charterers’ riskâ€ and “perils of the sea excepted even when occasioned by negligence.â€', 'Reginald Townsend Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-03-22', 'SHIPPING'),
(6228, 'Thorne V Motor Trade Association and Another', '', '../links/cases/Thorne V Motor Trade Association and Anothe1.pdf', 'Yes', 'Whites & Co ., Peacock & Goddard', '1937', 'High Court', 'Thorne V Motor Trade Association and Another The respondent trust, a corporate body constituted by the Singapore Improvement Ordinance 1927, made a declaration that a house owned by the appellant company was insanitary within the meaning of s 57 of the Ordinance.', 'T A Dillon Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-06-03', 'CRIMINAL LAW '),
(6229, 'Tibbals v Port of London Authority', '', '../links/cases/Tibbals v Port of London Authority.pdf', 'Yes', 'Pattinson & Brewer., J D Ritchie', '1937', 'High Court', 'Tibbals v Port of London Authority Upon its incorporation the respondent authority took over a pension scheme, whereby it was provided that deductions be made from the wages payable to certain employees (including the appellant), and that, for the purpose of computing the superannuation allowance or pension payable to each employee, the wages were to be deemed to be at the rate of the actual wages paid to him at the time of his superannuation or retirement', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-03-08', 'PENSIONS'),
(6230, 'D v National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children', '', '../links/cases/D v National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Childre1.pdf', 'Yes', 'Ashurst, Morris, Crisp & Co', '1977', 'Appeal', 'D v National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children The appellant (‘the society’) was a voluntary body incorporated by royal charter whose purpose included\r\nthe prevention of public and private wrongs to children and the taking of action to enforce laws for the\r\nprotection of children.', 'Mary Rose Plummer Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1977-02-02', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6231, 'Davis (Inspector of Taxes) v Powell', '', '../links/cases/Davis.pdf', 'Yes', 'Kaufman, Kramer & Shebson., Victor D Zermansky & Co, Leeds', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Davis (Inspector of Taxes) v Powell The taxpayer, a tenant farmer, surrendered his lease of agricultural land in consequence of a notice to\r\nquit from his landlord. The landlord paid him the sum of £591 by way of compensation for disturbance\r\nunder s 34(1)a of the Agricultural Holdings Act 1948.', 'Rengan Krishnan Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-12-01', 'TAXATION'),
(6232, 'Delbourgo v Field (Inspector of Taxes)', '', '../links/cases/Delbourgo v Field.pdf', 'Yes', 'Furley, Page, Fielding & Pembrook', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Delbourgo v Field (Inspector of Taxes) In 1968 the taxpayer entered into two agreements with an investment trust (‘Triumph’). By the first\r\n(‘the vending agreement’) the taxpayer agreed to sell his shareholding in D Ltd on certain terms to\r\nTriumph, and by the second (‘the service agreement’) he agreed to serve two subsidiaries of Triumph as\r\nmanaging director for ten years.', 'Rengan Krishnan Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-08', 'TAXATION'),
(6233, 'Director of Public Prosecutions v Holly', '', '../links/cases/Director of Public Prosecutions v Holly.pdf', 'Yes', 'Montague Gardner & Co', '1977', 'Supreme', 'Director of Public Prosecutions v Holly The expression ‘public body’ in s 7a of the Public Bodies Corrupt Practices Act 1898 and ss 2b and 4(2)c\r\nof the Prevention of Corruption Act 1916 is not restricted to local authorities but refers to any body\r\nwhich has public or statutory duties to perform and which perform those duties and carry out their\r\ntransactions for the benefit of the public and not for private profit.', 'Mary Rose Plummer Barrister.', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '1977-01-27', 'CRIMINAL'),
(6234, 'Director of Public Prosecutions v Jordan', '', '../links/cases/Director of Public Prosecutions v Jordan.pdf', 'Yes', 'Offenbach & Co', '1976', 'Supreme', 'Director of Public Prosecutions v Jordan The appellant was the proprietress of a newsagent’s and book shop. The police seized a quantity of\r\nfilms, books and magazines from the shop which had been freely available for sale to members of the\r\npublic.', 'Mary Rose Plummer Barrister.', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-16', 'CRIMINAL'),
(6235, 'Dixon v Harding and others', '', '../links/cases/Dixon v Harding and others.pdf', 'Yes', 'Solicitors: Sharpe, Pritchard & Co., Collyer-Bristow & Co., Gotelee & Goldsmith', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Dixon v Harding and others The respondents were the owners of a commercial building which from 8 February 1974 to 30\r\nSeptember 1975 (’the relevant period’) was unoccupied and therefore not being used for the purposes\r\nfor which it had been constructed or adapted.', 'Lea Josse Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-26', 'LOCAL GOVERNMENT'),
(6236, 'Dugdale v Kraft Foods Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Dugdale v Kraft Foods Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Rowleys & Blewitts., Walker, Smith & Way, Chester', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Dugdale v Kraft Foods Ltd The female employees were employed in the quality control department of the employers’ factory. The\r\nfemale employees’ work was of the same or a broadly similar nature to that done by the male\r\nemployees employed in the same department.', 'Salim H J Merali Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-10-28', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6237, 'Dutton v Spink and Beeching (Sales) Ltd and others', '', '../links/cases/Dutton v Spink and Beeching.pdf', 'Yes', 'Harold G Walker & Co., H Kennard & Son', '1976', 'High Court', 'Dutton v Spink and Beeching (Sales) Ltd and others In September 1969 the plaintiff met the defendants and gave them certain information relating to an\r\nappliance for typewriters which he claimed to have invented. On 25 June 1971 the plaintiff issued a writ\r\nagainst the defendants alleging that he had imparted the information in confidence and claiming relief\r\nfor breach of confidence and damages for trade libel.', 'L I Zysman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-05-26', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6238, 'Emmerson (Inspector of Taxes) v Computer Time International Ltd (in liquidation', '', '../links/cases/Emmerson.pdf', 'Yes', 'Kingsley, Napley & Co', '1977', 'High Court', 'Emmerson (Inspector of Taxes) v Computer Time International Ltd (in liquidation A company carried on business in premises on the second floor of a building which it occupied under a\r\nlease for a term of 21 years from 25 March 1969 at a rent of £19,000 per annum, payable quarterly in\r\nadvance on the usual quarter days.', 'Rengan Krishnan Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1977-02-11', 'TAXATION'),
(6239, 'Faulkner v Love (trading as W Love & Son)', '', '../links/cases/Faulkner v Love.pdf', 'Yes', 'Raymond & Williams., Lovell, Son & Pitfield', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Faulkner v Love (trading as W Love & Son) The occupier of a mobile home on a protected site was dissatisfied with the terms of the agreement\r\noffered to him, in accordance with s 1(2)a of the Mobile Homes Act 1975, by the site owner. The\r\noccupier applied, under s 4(5)b of the 1975 Act, to a county court (‘the first court’) for the determination\r\nof the matter in dispute on the agreement.', 'Mary Rose Plummer Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-24', 'ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE'),
(6240, 'Federal Commerce and Navigation Co Ltd v Tradax Export SA', '', '../links/cases/Federal Commerce and Navigation Co Ltd v Tradax Export SA.pdf', 'Yes', 'Richards, Butler and Co., Holman, Fenwick and Willan', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Federal Commerce and Navigation Co Ltd v Tradax Export SA By a port charter made in January 1970 the vessel Maratha Envoy, a large bulk carrier, was engaged to\r\ncarry a cargo of grain from American to North Europe.', 'J H Fazan Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-25', 'SHIPPING'),
(6241, 'Ferguson v John Dawson & Partners (Contractors) Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Ferguson v John Dawson & Partners (Contractors) Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'John King & Co., Crombie, Wilkinson & Robinson', '1976', 'High Court', 'Ferguson v John Dawson & Partners (Contractors) Ltd In January 1972 the defendants, who were building contractors, orally engaged the plaintiff through\r\ntheir site agent to work as a general labourer. The plaintiff was told that there were no cards, they\r\nwere ‘purely working as a lump labour force’.', 'Mary Rose Plummer Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-07-22', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6242, 'Fitzleet Estates Ltd v Cherry (Inspector of Taxes)', '', '../links/cases/Fitzleet Estates Ltd v Cherry.pdf', 'Yes', 'Slaughter & May', '1976', 'Supreme', 'Fitzleet Estates Ltd v Cherry (Inspector of Taxes) The taxpayer company (‘the company’) was a property holding company and a subsidiary of B Ltd. The\r\ncompany purchased sites in 1959 and 1960 and developed them between 1960 and 1961. In the course\r\nof the development, the company incurred interest charges on money borrowed from B Ltd and from its\r\nbankers.', 'Rengan Krishnan Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-12-03', 'TAXATION'),
(6243, 'Tomley v Shreeve', '', '../links/cases/Tomley v Shreeve.pdf', 'Yes', 'J C Brookhouse., Owen White & Catlin', '1937', 'High Court', 'Tomley v Shreeve It was alleged that a local branch of a friendly society had improperly purchased certain freehold property, and the parent society sued for a declaration that the purchase was an improper one, in breach of the rules and a breach of trust, and that the defendants were to make good to the lodge the money spent upon the purchase', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-03-26', 'COMPANY'),
(6244, 'Fougere v Phoenix Motor Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Fougere v Phoenix Motor Co Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Kenneth Brown, Baker, Simpson, Millar', '1976', 'High Court', 'Fougere v Phoenix Motor Co Ltd The appellant, who was 58 years of age, was employed by the respondents. He was in poor health and\r\nonly fit to do light work at his own pace. The respondents dismissed him from his employment. An\r\nindustrial tribunal held that he had been unfairly dismissed.', 'Salim H J Merali Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-06-30', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6245, 'Foy v Brooks', '', '../links/cases/Foy v Brooks.pdf', 'Yes', 'Woodbridge & Sons', '1976', 'Supreme', 'Foy v Brooks In affiliation proceedings the mother applied for an order for payment by the putative father of the sum\r\nof £50 expended by the mother on providing blankets, napkins, vests, suits, bottles, feeding equipment\r\nand sheets for the child on its birth on the ground that the sum expended constituted ‘expenses\r\nincidental to the birth of the child’, within s 4(2)(b) of the Affiliation Proceedings Act 1957.', 'Georgina Chambers Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-10-18', 'FAMILY'),
(6246, 'Trubyfield v Great Western Railway Co', '', '../links/cases/Trubyfield v Great Western Railway Co.pdf', 'Yes', 'Barlow Lyde & Gilbert., A G Hubbard', '1937', 'High Court', 'Trubyfield v Great Western Railway Co Held – though, in the case of a very young child, some reduction of damages must be made, having regard to children’s ailments, yet, in the case of one who has outlived such dangers, there should be no such reduction on account of the infancy. The question of the inability of the child to appreciate the loss of expectation of life is wholly immaterial.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-12-03', 'TORTS'),
(6247, 'French Kier Developments Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment and another', '', '../links/cases/French Kier Developments Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment and another.pdf', 'Yes', 'Bates, Son & Braby', '1976', 'High Court', 'French Kier Developments Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment and another The appellants applied for planning permission to develop for residential purposes 42 acres of land at\r\nGrays in Essex. The site formed part of the metropolitan green belt but it was also in an area of major\r\ngrowth where it was government policy to encourage local authorities to have in hand a five year supply\r\nof residential land.', 'K Mydeen Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-10-19', 'TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING'),
(6248, 'General and Municipal Workers Union v Certification Officer and another', '', '../links/cases/General and Municipal Workers Union v Certification Officer and another.pdf', 'Yes', 'Stanley, Washbrough & Co', '1976', 'High Court', 'General and Municipal Workers Union v Certification Officer and another An association of employees applied to the certification officer, under s 8(1) of the Employment\r\nProtection Act 1975, for a certificate that it was independent. The certification officer advertised the\r\napplication, pursuant to s 8(6)a, and a trade union (‘the GMWU’) made representations to him opposing\r\nthe grant of a certificate.', 'Salim H J Merali Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-10-08', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6249, 'Tudor-Hart v British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection', '', '../links/cases/Tudor.pdf', 'Yes', 'Deacon & Co., Underwood Barron & Co', '1937', 'High Court', 'Tudor-Hart v British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection In answer to a claim for libel, it was pleaded that, in so far as the words complained of were statements of fact, they were true in substance and in fact, and, in so far as they were expressions of opinion, they were fair comment upon the “said factsâ€ which were matters of public interest.', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-11-22', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6250, 'Gilbert v Goldstone Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Gilbert v Goldstone Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Victor D Zermansky & Co., J Levi & Co, Leeds', '1976', 'High Court', 'Gilbert v Goldstone Ltd The applicant was employed for many years as a cutter by the respondents, a firm of clothing\r\nmanufacturers. Unlike the rest of the work force the applicant was paid on a monthly basis and,\r\nalthough the terms of his employment required him to work overtime when necessary, he was not\r\nentitled to any additional remuneration for overtime work.', 'Salim H J Merali Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-07-09', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6251, 'Union Cold Storage Co Ltd v Ellerker', '', '../links/cases/Union Cold Storage Co Ltd v Ellerker.pdf', 'Yes', 'Pinsent & Co., Solicitor of Inland Revenue', '1938', 'High Court', 'Union Cold Storage Co Ltd v Ellerker In 1901, the appellant company were granted for a term of 40 years a lease of land upon which a warehouse was to be erected by the lessors, the rent being based partly upon the cost of erection.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-23', 'TAXATION'),
(6252, 'Goldsmith v Pressdram Ltd and others', '', '../links/cases/Goldsmith v Pressdram Ltd and others.pdf', 'Yes', 'Eric Levine & Co, Bindman & Partners', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Goldsmith v Pressdram Ltd and others The applicant, who was the chairman of several large public companies, was subjected to a persistent\r\ncampaign of a defamatory character in a fortnightly magazine published, edited and distributed by the\r\nrespondents.', 'Christine Ivamy Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-04-14', 'TORTS'),
(6253, 'Gouriet v Union of Post Office Workers and others', '', '../links/cases/Gouriet v Union of Post Office Workers and others.pdf', 'Yes', 'Trower, Still & Keeling, Shaen Roscoe & Bracewell', '1977', 'Appeal', 'Gouriet v Union of Post Office Workers and others On the evening of Thursday, 13 January 1977, the plaintiff saw a news bulletin on television in which it\r\nwas reported that the executive council of the Union of Post Office Workers had resolved that day to call\r\non its members to impose a boycott on all postal communications between Britain and South Africa.', 'Sumra Green Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1977-01-27', 'ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE'),
(6254, 'Green and others v Broxtowe District Council', '', '../links/cases/Green and others v Broxtowe District Council.pdf', 'Yes', 'Anderson & Co, Nottingham', '1976', 'High Court', 'Green and others v Broxtowe District Council It seems to us that the first words of that subsection are plainly mandatory. I repeat: ‘A woman is to be\r\nregarded as employed on work rated as equivalent with that of any men’ if her job has been given an\r\nequal value under a study undertaken with a view to evaluating jobs.', 'Salim H J Merali Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-10', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6255, 'Hobbs v Marlowe', '', '../links/cases/Hobbs v Marlowe.pdf', 'Yes', 'Hewitt Woollacott & Chown ., Amery-Parkes & Co', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Hobbs v Marlowe The plaintiff’s motor car was involved in a collision with the defendant’s car. The collision was caused by\r\nthe defendant’s negligence. The cost of repairing the damage to the plaintiff’s car was £237·59. In\r\naddition the plaintiff incurred expenses of £63·53 in hiring another car while his own was being repaired.', 'Mary Rose Plummer Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-10-21', 'INSURANCE'),
(6256, 'Unsworth v Pease & Partners Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Unsworth v Pease.pdf', 'Yes', 'Johnson Weatherall Sturt & Hardy., Corbin Greener & Cook', '1937', 'High Court', 'Unsworth v Pease & Partners Ltd A miner, in addition to his work as a collier, acted as a sub-checkweighman at the colliery and collected subscriptions from members of his union.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-05-11', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6257, 'Home Counties Dairies Ltd v Woods', '', '../links/cases/Home Counties Dairies Ltd v Woods.pdf', 'Yes', 'Warner, Goodman & Co., P N Jones, Woking', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Home Counties Dairies Ltd v Woods In May 1973 W started employment with a company as a milk salesman. The Industrial Relations Act\r\n1971 was then in force and W’s contract of employment set out his right under that Act to join, or not to\r\nbe a member of, a trade union.', 'Salim H J Merali Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-10-19', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6258, 'House and others v Reynolds', '', '../links/cases/House and others v Reynolds.pdf', 'Yes', 'Hepherd, Winstanley & Pugh., Matthew Reynolds,Southampton', '1976', 'Appeal', 'House and others v ReynoldsThe appellants, some of whom were drivers and the others proprietors of taxis, were members of a\r\ngroup of operators running a centralised telephone booking office for the hire of taxis. The practice of\r\nthe appellants was to require a person wishing to hire a taxi by telephone to pay, in addition to the fare\r\nrecorded on the taximeter, a ‘booking fee’ of 10p.', 'N P Metcalfe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-03', 'TRANSPORT'),
(6259, 'Uxbridge Permanent Benefit Building Society v Pickard', '', '../links/cases/Uxbridge Permanent Benefit Building Society v Pickard.pdf', 'Yes', 'Woodbridge & Sons., Pickard & Co', '1938', 'High Court', 'Uxbridge Permanent Benefit Building Society v Pickard A solicitor’s managing clerk obtained an advance of a sum of £500 upon a mortgage of property by producing to the society’s solicitors a fictitious deed. It was not proved that the solicitor’s clerk actually forged the deed, but he must have known that it was a forged document.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-08', 'TORTS'),
(6260, 'Ichard and another v Frangoulis', '', '../links/cases/Ichard and another v Frangoulis.pdf', 'Yes', 'R I Lewis & Co., Barlow, Lyde & Gilbert', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Ichard and another v Frangoulis Damages in tort for loss of enjoyment of a holiday resulting from injuries sustained in a car accident\r\noccurring whilst the plaintiff is on holiday are, if the loss is reasonably foreseeable, recoverable from the\r\nnegligent party as part of the general damages, but not as a separate head of damage', 'K Mydeen Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-01', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6261, 'Vernazza v Barburriza & Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Vernazza v Barburriza.pdf', 'Yes', 'Clapham Fraser & Williams', '1937', 'Supreme', 'Vernazza v Barburriza & Co Ltd During the trial of an action for breach of contract and wrongful dismissal, the plaintiff had a discussion with the judge in his private room, of which discussion a shorthand note was taken, by the judge’s orders. No representative of the defendants was present at the discussion.', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-11-15', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6262, 'Industrial Properties', '', '../links/cases/Industrial Properties.pdf', 'Yes', 'Lewis, Lewis and Co., Wilde, Sapte and Co', '1977', 'Appeal', 'Industrial Properties In 1959 the Parker family agreed to sell certain freehold premises which they owned to a newly formed\r\ncompany, IP Ltd, of which they were the directors and the shareholders. The agreement was registered\r\nand the purchase price paid but the premises were never conveyed to IP Ltd.', 'Wendy Shockett Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1977-02-02', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6263, 'Vernon v Findlay', '', '../links/cases/Vernon v Findlay.pdf', 'Yes', 'Scott Duckers & Co., Gamlen Bowerman & Forward., Forsyte Kerman & Phillips', '1938', 'Appeal', 'Vernon v Findlay On 1 December 1936, the defendants entered into a verbal contract with the plaintiff to employ him as sales manager as from 1 January 1937, for a company to be formed, at a salary of £350 per year and commission.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-02', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6264, 'Victor Weston (Fabrics) Ltd v Morgensterns (a Firm)', '', '../links/cases/Victor Weston.pdf', 'Yes', 'Henry Hilbery & Son.,Wigram & Co', '1937', 'Supreme', 'Victor Weston (Fabrics) Ltd v Morgensterns (a Firm) The defendants executed a deed of arrangement for the benefit of their creditors. The trustee under the deed sent a circular letter to all the defendants’ creditors announcing the deed and undertaking to pay for goods ordered for current purposes.', 'Gerald Abrahams Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-03-09', 'BANKRUPTCY'),
(6265, 'Inland Revenue Commissioners v Cookson', '', '../links/cases/Inland Revenue Commissioners v Cookson.pdf', 'Yes', 'Dickinson Dees and Co', '1977', 'High Court', 'Inland Revenue Commissioners v Cookson By a trust instrument dated 19 March 1953 the taxpayer settled certain freehold land, inter alia, on trust\r\nfor himself for his life and from and after his death for the first and every other son of the taxpayer\r\nsuccessively in remainder one after the other, according to seniority, in tail male, with remainders over.', 'L I Zysman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1977-01-27', 'TAXATION'),
(6266, 'James Buchanan & Co Ltd v Babco Forwarding and Shipping (UK) Ltd', '', '../links/cases/James Buchanan.pdf', 'Yes', 'Ingledew, Brown, Bennison & Garrett,Elborne, Mitchell & Co', '1976', 'Supreme', 'James Buchanan & Co Ltd v Babco Forwarding and Shipping (UK) Ltd The plaintiffs who were whisky distillers agreed to sell a quantity of whisky to buyers in Iran. The\r\nplaintiffs contracted with carriers for the carriage of the whisky from Scotland, where it was in a bonded\r\nwarehouse, to Iran; the carriage was to be via Felixstowe, across the Channel and through Europe.', 'Wendy Shockett Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-12-02', 'CONTRACT'),
(6267, 'Jean Kraut AG v Albany Fabrics Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Jean Kraut AG v Albany Fabrics Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Fremont & Co.,Benson, Mazure & Co', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Jean Kraut AG v Albany Fabrics Ltd The defendants, an English company, contracted to buy from the plaintiffs, a Swiss company, a quantity\r\nof cloth to be delivered in monthly consignments of specified amounts. The proper law of the contract\r\nwas Swiss.', 'Christine Ivamy Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-03-01', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6268, 'Walker v Walker and Walker', '', '../links/cases/Walker v Walker and Walker.pdf', 'Yes', 'Atkinson Saunders & Co., Drake Son & Parton., Samuel Bishop & Sons', '1937', 'Appeal', 'Walker v Walker and Walker A husband obtained a decree nisi of dissolution of marriage on the ground of the wife’s adultery with the co-respondent, who was ordered to pay the costs of the suit.', 'M D Chorlton Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-06-21', 'FAMILY'),
(6269, 'Johnson v Inland Revenue Commissioners', '', '../links/cases/Johnson v Inland Revenue Commissioners.pdf', 'Yes', 'J Memery & Co', '1976', 'High Court', 'Johnson v Inland Revenue Commissioners The taxpayer and her husband during their married life were not separately assessed to tax. The\r\nhusband was assessed to surtax for the years 1961–62 and 1965–66. Those assessments were made,\r\nrespectively in 1962 and 1966.', 'Rengan Krishnan Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-12', 'TAXATION'),
(6270, 'Johnson v Ribbins and others (Sir Francis Pittis & Son (a firm), third party)', '', '../links/cases/Johnson v Ribbins and others.pdf', 'Yes', 'Reynolds, Porter, Chamberlain & Co., Charles Mason & Co', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Johnson v Ribbins and others (Sir Francis Pittis & Son (a firm), third party) Where a question arises as to the incidence of costs between a successful defendant and a successful\r\nthird party in a case where the plaintiff is legally aided, there is no principle that the impact of legal aid\r\nshould be made to fall on the defendant and third party alike and that the court should therefore order\r\nthe third party’s costs to be paid by the plaintiff and not be the defendant.', 'Sumra Green Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-12-01', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6271, 'Way v Latilla', '', '../links/cases/Way v Latilla.pdf', 'Yes', 'Edwin Coe & Calder Wood., Birkbeck Julius Edwards & Co', '1937', 'High Court', 'Way v Latilla The appellant alleged that he had made an agreement with the respondent that the appellant should obtain and send to the respondent information relating to gold mines and concessions in West Africa, and that the appellant should introduce concessions for acquisition by the respondent, and that the respondent would protect the appellant’s interests in respect of concessions acquired, and give to the appellant the customary, or a reasonable, share in the same, and should pay to the appellant a reasonable sum in respect of information and reports.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-07-28', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6272, 'Jones (A E) v Jones (F W)', '', '../links/cases/Jones.pdf', 'Yes', 'Mears, Hobbs & Durrant, Lowestoft,Lucas & Wyllys, Lowestoft', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Jones (A E) v Jones (F W) In 1964 the defendant’s father remarried. On his remarriage he made a will bequeathing to his new\r\nwife, the plaintiff, all his property other than two houses in Kingston upon Thames in which the\r\ndefendant and his brother, respectively, were living.', 'Gavin Gore-Andrews Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-10-28', 'LAND'),
(6273, 'Jowett v Earl of Bradford', '', '../links/cases/Jowett v Earl of Bradford.pdf', 'Yes', 'Bowdler & Sons, Shrewsbury,O H Parsons', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Jowett v Earl of Bradford The employee applied to an industrial tribunal for compensation for unfair dismissal. At the end of the\r\nhearing the tribunal (‘the first tribunal’) orally indicated that it found in favour of the employee and that\r\nthe matter should be referred to the employer with a recommendation that the employee be\r\nreinstated.', 'Salim H J Merali Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-25', 'ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE'),
(6274, 'Welch v Royal Exchange Assurance', '', '../links/cases/Welch v Royal Exchange Assurance.pdf', 'Yes', 'Philip Conway Thomas & Co., William Charles Crocker', '1938', 'High Court', 'Welch v Royal Exchange Assurance The claimant was insured with the defendants against fire, and the policy contained a condition which, so far as its nature permitted, was deemed to be a condition precedent to the right of the insured to recover thereunder.', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-11', 'INSURANCE'),
(6275, 'Whatmough v Morris Motors Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Whatmough v Morris Motors Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'C R Enever & Co .,Preston Lane-Claypon & O’Kelly', '1938', 'High Court', 'Whatmough v Morris Motors Ltd In that state of the rule, Clauson J, as he then was, in a case which came before him—namely, Fraser v Simpsons (Piccadilly) Ltd and Platinum Products Ltd—elaborated a form of order which gave full effect, if I may so describe it, to what appeared to be the policy of the rule.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-10-25', 'INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY'),
(6276, 'White v Bijou Mansions Ltd', '', '../links/cases/White v Bijou Mansions Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'T & N Blanco White., Laytons', '1937', 'High Court', 'White v Bijou Mansions Ltd The plaintiff, the registered proprietor of certain property, derived title under two deeds of 1886 and 1887 which contained a covenant by the purchaser of the property, which formed part of an estate, that he would build a dwelling-house thereon and that he would use the same for a private residence, and for no other purpose.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-05-28', 'LAND '),
(6277, 'Williams v Johnson (since deceased), now represented by Williams and Another', '', '../links/cases/Williams v Johnson.pdf', 'Yes', 'Leader Plunkett & Leader., Laurence Jones & Co', '1937', 'High Court', 'Williams v Johnson (since deceased), now represented by Williams and Another Appellant, a medical practitioner, and an intimate friend of the respondent, an elderly widow, attended her professionally during two illnesses in the years 1928 and 1930.', 'T A Dillon Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-07-11', 'COMMONWEALTH'),
(6278, 'Wilson v Wright', '', '../links/cases/Wilson v Wright.pdf', 'Yes', 'Ingledew Sons & Brown., Kinch & Richardson', '1937', 'High Court', 'Wilson v Wright The seller offered for sale potatoes “for Saturday’s steamer.â€ The buyer accepted the potatoes by telegram, adding the words “next steamer,â€ which was in fact “Saturday’s steamer.â€', 'Reginald Townsend Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-11-12', 'SALE OF GOODS'),
(6279, 'Wiltshire Bacon Co Ltd v Associated Cinema Properties Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Wiltshire Bacon Co Ltd v Associated Cinema Properties Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Sharpe Pritchard & Co., H S Wright & Webb', '1937', 'Appeal', 'Wiltshire Bacon Co Ltd v Associated Cinema Properties Ltd The plaintiffs complained that a building which the defendants were erecting would interfere with certain ancient lights. Negotiations were entered into to see if the parties could agree a sum by way of compensation for the damage which the plaintiffs alleged would be caused to their property.', 'Reginald Townsend Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-10-15', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6280, 'Withington v Bolton Borough Council', '', '../links/cases/Withington v Bolton Borough Council.pdf', 'Yes', 'Walter H Goulding.,  H B Ashford', '1937', 'High Court', 'Withington v Bolton Borough Council A road had been dedicated to and accepted by the public but not yet adopted by the local authority, so that the road was repairable by no one.', 'M D Chorlton Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-05-05', 'ENVIRONMENTAL'),
(6281, 'Woodman v Richardson and Concrete Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Woodman v Richardson and Concrete Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Forsyte Kerman & Phillips., L Bingham & Co', '1937', 'Appeal', 'Woodman v Richardson and Concrete Ltd R had contracted to erect a building and to do so he had to erect a scaffolding for the use of his own workmen and of the sub-contractors’ workmen', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-07-29', 'TORTS'),
(6282, 'Woods v Woods', '', '../links/cases/Woods v Woods.pdf', 'Yes', 'Braikenridge & Edwards ., J B de Fonblanque., Piper Smith & Piper', '1938', 'Appeal', 'Woods v Woods The respondent, a solicitor, was anxious to obtain a divorce from his wife. In 1934 the wife had, with the approval of the husband, agreed to purchase a house, and found herself in the greatest straits to find £115 19s 3d required to complete the purchase.', 'J F Compton Miller Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-07-28', 'FAMILY'),
(6283, 'Workington Harbour and Dock Board v Trade Indemnity Co Ltd (No 2)', '', '../links/cases/Workington Harbour and Dock Board v Trade Indemnity Co Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Wedlake Letts & Birds., Johnson Weatherall Sturt & Hardy', '1937', 'High Court', 'Workington Harbour and Dock Board v Trade Indemnity Co Ltd (No 2) A firm of contractors agreed to construct a new and enlarged dock. The defendant company gave the dock board a bond in the sum of £50,000 to guarantee the performance of the contract. The contractors defaulted, and the dock board brought an action against the defendant company upon the bond.', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-05-25', 'CONTRACT'),
(6284, 'Worshipful Company of Carpenters of the City of London v British Mutual Banking Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Worshipful Company of Carpenters of the City of London v British Mutual Banking Co Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Sir John J Stavridi., White & Leonard & Nicholls & Co', '1937', 'High Court', 'Worshipful Company of Carpenters of the City of London v British Mutual Banking Co Ltd The plaintiffs, as managers of a convalescent home, kept an account with the defendant bank. The plaintiffs employed a secretary of the committee which managed the home, who kept his personal account with the defendant bank.', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-07-29', 'BANKING AND FINANCE'),
(6285, 'Wragg v Samuel Fox & Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Wragg v Samuel Fox.pdf', 'Yes', 'Corbin Greener & Cook., Raley & Sons., Sturt & Hardy., Rhodes Cockburn & Co', '1937', 'Appeal', 'Wragg v Samuel Fox & Co Ltd The appellant had been employed by the respondents for 41 years up to April 1935, the last 20 years being spent underground in a coal mine.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-03-15', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6286, 'Wyatt v Wyatt', '', '../links/cases/Wyatt v Wyatt.pdf', 'Yes', 'Peacock & Goddard., Treasury Solicitor', '1937', 'High Court', 'Wyatt v Wyatt A husband and wife separated in the summer of 1935, there being no suggestion of adultery up to that time. Before parting, discussions had taken place as to a divorce based upon evidence to be provided by the husband, the wife even suggesting that, for the sake of the husband’s career, he should divorce her, but this the husband refused to consider.', 'J F Compton Miller Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-07-20', 'FAMILY'),
(6287, 'Yukon Consolidated Gold Corporation Ltd v Clark', '', '../links/cases/Yukon Consolidated Gold Corporation Ltd v Clark.pdf', 'Yes', 'Broad & Son., Percy Haseldine Co', '1937', 'High Court', 'Yukon Consolidated Gold Corporation Ltd v Clark The defendant brought an action against the plaintiff company in the Supreme Court of Ontario. The action was dismissed with costs, and an appeal to the Court of Appeal in Ontario was also dismissed with costs.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-03-22', 'CONTRACT'),
(6288, 'Zetland (Marquess) and Zetland Estates Company v Driver and Another', '', '../links/cases/Zetland vrs driver.pdf', 'Yes', 'Frere Cholmeley & Co., H E Griffith & Son', '1937', 'High Court', 'Zetland (Marquess) and Zetland Estates Company v Driver and Another A conveyance of shop premises, being a small portion of a large area of settled land, contained the following covenant: “The purchaser to the intent and so as to bind so far as practicable the property hereby conveyed into whosesoever hands the same may come and to benefit and protect such part or parts of the lands now subject to the settlement (a) as shall for the time being remain unsold or (b) as shall be sold by the vendor or his successors in title with the express benefit of this covenant covenants with the vendor that the purchaser will at all times observe …â€ and in particular that “no act or thing shall be done or permitted on the said land which in the opinion of the vendor may be a public or private nuisance or prejudicial or detrimental to the vendor and the owners or occupiers of any adjoining property or to the neighbourhood.â€', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1937-07-29', 'LAND '),
(6289, 'K v K (divorce costs: interest)', '', '../links/cases/K v K.pdf', 'Yes', 'Theodore Goddard & Co.,', '1976', 'High Court', 'K v K (divorce costs: interest) The husband and wife were divorced in 1972. The first part of the divorce proceedings, up to decree\r\nabsolute, took place in the county court. The proceedings were then transferred to the High Court for\r\ndetermination of the wife’s application for ancillary relief.', 'Wendy Shockett Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-02', 'FAMILY'),
(6290, 'Kennealy and another v Dunne and another', '', '../links/cases/Kennealy and another v Dunne and another.pdf', 'Yes', 'Barnett & Co., P Ellis & Co', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Kennealy and another v Dunne and another The landlords were the owners of a flat in a building in London which previously they had occupied as\r\ntheir residence.', 'Mary Rose Plummer Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-26', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6291, 'Laker Airways Ltd v Department of Trade', '', '../links/cases/Laker Airways Ltd v Department of Trade.pdf', 'Yes', 'Roney Vincent & Co', '1976', 'Supreme', 'Laker Airways Ltd v Department of Trade In October 1972 the plaintiffs were granted an air transport licence by the Civil Aviation Authority (‘the\r\nCAA’) under the Civil Aviation Act 1971 to provide a low cost passenger air service, known as ‘Skytrain’,\r\nfor a period of 10 years from 1 January 1973 between London and New York.', 'Gavin Gore-Andrews Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-12-15', 'AVIATION'),
(6292, 'Lively Ltd and another v City of Munich', '', '../links/cases/Lively Ltd and another v City of Munich.pdf', 'Yes', 'Kenneth Brown, Baker, Simpson, Millar', '1976', 'Supreme', 'Lively Ltd and another v City of Munich The plaintiffs were registered holders of bonds issued by the defendants in 1928. The terms of the\r\nbonds provided, inter alia, that they would be redeemable by 1 December 1953 at the holder’s option in\r\neither sterling or United States dollars at a fixed rate of $4·86 to the pound, but the loan went into\r\ndefault on the outbreak of war in 1939.', 'R L Bayne-Powell', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-06-30', 'BANKING AND FINANCE'),
(6293, 'London and Harrogate Securities Ltd v Pitts and another', '', '../links/cases/London and Harrogate Securities Ltd v Pitts and another.pdf', 'Yes', 'Malcolm Brookes & Co.,Coward Chance', '1976', 'Supreme', 'London and Harrogate Securities Ltd v Pitts and another In May 1974 the plaintiffs, who were licensed moneylenders, lent P £16,500 for two months. Part of the\r\nloan was used to discharge a mortgage of £3,500 outstanding on P’s property which he had contracted\r\nto sell.', 'Mary Rose Plummer Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-07-06', 'CONSUMER'),
(6294, 'Lord Chetwode v Inland Revenue Commissioners', '', '../links/cases/Lord Chetwode v Inland Revenue Commissioners.pdf', 'Yes', 'Withers', '1977', 'Supreme', 'Lord Chetwode v Inland Revenue Commissioners At all material times, the taxpayer was ordinarily resident in the United Kingdom. In 1967, he created a\r\nsettlement and appointed TCB Ltd, a company incorporated in the Bahamas, as trustee of the\r\nsettlement.', 'Rengan Krishnan Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1977-02-16', 'TAXATION'),
(6295, 'MacShannon v Rockware Glass Ltd', '', '../links/cases/MacShannon v Rockware Glass Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Davies Arnold & Cooper., Robin Thompson and Partners', '1977', 'Appeal', 'MacShannon v Rockware Glass Ltd The plaintiff was a Scotsman who lived and worked in Scotland. He was employed by the defendants, a\r\nlimited company. Although the defendants had a place of business in Scotland, their registered office\r\nand headquarters were in London.', 'Sumra Green Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1977-02-16', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6296, 'Maharaj v Attorney General for Trinidad and Tobago', '', '../links/cases/Maharaj v Attorney General for Trinidad and Tobago.pdf', 'Yes', 'Charles Russell & Co', '1976', 'High Court', 'Maharaj v Attorney General for Trinidad and Tobago On 2 April 1975 the appellant was engaged as counsel in a case in the Court of Appeal, Trinidad which\r\nwas estimated to last five days. The appellant had also accepted two briefs to appear in another court\r\non 14 April.', 'Mary Rose Plummer Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-10-11', 'ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE'),
(6297, 'Makins v Elson', '', '../links/cases/Makins v Elson.pdf', 'Yes', 'Kenneth Brown, Baker, Simpson, Millar', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Makins v Elson In July 1970 the taxpayer purchased for £1,800 a plot of land in respect of which planning permission for\r\na dwelling-house had already been granted. In August 1970 he moved on to the site with a caravan and\r\nlived there with his family.', 'Rengan Krishnan Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-18', 'TAXATION'),
(6298, 'Mardorf Peach & Co Ltd v Attica Sea Carriers Corporation of Liberia', '', '../links/cases/Mardorf Peach.pdf', 'Yes', 'Clyde & Co., Holman Fenwick & Willan', '1977', 'Supreme', 'Mardorf Peach & Co Ltd v Attica Sea Carriers Corporation of Liberia The appellants were the owners of a ship which they chartered in January 1970 to the respondents on a\r\ntime charter. The charterparty provided that the hire was to be paid ‘in cash semi-monthly in advance’\r\nand was to be paid ‘to the Owners … into their account’ with the branch of a bank (‘FNCB’) to the credit\r\nof a named account.', 'Mary Rose Plummer Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1977-02-02', 'SHIPPING'),
(6299, 'Maynard v Osmond', '', '../links/cases/Maynard v Osmond.pdf', 'Yes', 'Bernard Sheridan & Co., Theodore Goddard & Co', '1976', 'High Court', 'Maynard v Osmond In November 1975 three young men were arrested and charged with being drunk and disorderly. At the\r\npolice station they recognised the plaintiff, who was one of the constables on duty, as an acquaintance.\r\nThe men were put into cells for the night.', 'Wendy Shockett Barrister', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-05-24', 'CRIMINAL'),
(6300, 'McDonnell v McDonnell', '', '../links/cases/McDonnell v McDonnell.pdf', 'Yes', 'Kennedy, Ponsonby & PrideauxCharles Russell & Co', '1976', 'Appeal', 'McDonnell v McDonnell On the wife’s application for ancillary relief, following her divorce, the judge ordered the husband to pay., \r\nthe wife a lump sum of £2,000 and periodical payments, and also ordered the husband to transfer to the\r\nwife his interest in the matrimonial home (originally acquired by the husband but subsequently\r\ntransferred into the parties’ joint names), subject to a fixed charge in the husband’s favour of £10,000,\r\nwhich represented one-third of the value of the house.', 'L I Zysman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-04-12', 'ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE'),
(6301, 'Mehmet v Perry and another', '', '../links/cases/Mehmet v Perry and another.pdf', 'Yes', 'Hall, Grant & Co', '1976', 'High Court', 'Mehmet v Perry and another The plaintiff and his wife had five children under the age of 17. The two youngest children, H and S,\r\nsuffered from a rare blood disorder and as a result they had to be taken to hospital periodically to\r\nreceive blood transfusions; they also had to have daily injections which were administered at home by a\r\nnurse and had to be given tablets at home twice daily.', 'K Mydeen Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-03', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6302, 'Michael v Gowland', '', '../links/cases/Michael v Gowland.pdf', 'Yes', 'Ronald & Fletcher., Baker & Co', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Michael v Gowland On 15 October 1975 the applicant applied to justices for reduction of the amount payable by him under\r\nan affiliation order on the ground that his circumstances had changed since the order was made. The\r\njustices, acting without jurisdiction, increased the amount payable by the applicant under the order.', 'Georgina Chambers Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-30', 'ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE'),
(6303, 'Moeliker v A Reyrolle and Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Moeliker v A Reyrolle and Co Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'W H Thompson, Stanmore., Tilly Swangren & Co', '1976', 'High Court', 'Moeliker v A Reyrolle and Co Ltd In awarding damages for personal injury in a case where the plaintiff is still in employment at the date of\r\nthe trial, the court should only make an award for loss of earning capacity if there is a substantial or real,\r\nand not merely fanciful, risk that the plaintiff will lose his present employment at some time before the\r\nestimated end of his working life.', 'A S Virdi Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-01-30', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE');
INSERT INTO `courtrulings` (`id`, `title`, `content`, `link`, `isshow`, `author`, `date`, `courttype`, `summary`, `presiding`, `casetype`, `subjectmatter`, `caseno`, `counsel1`, `counsel2`, `courtname`, `caseDate`, `subjectmattertitle`) VALUES
(6304, 'Moore Properties (Ilford) Ltd v Mckeon and others', '', '../links/cases/Moore Properties.pdf', 'Yes', 'Shavin & Co., Windsor & Co', '1976', 'Supreme', 'Moore Properties (Ilford) Ltd v Mckeon and others By an agreement in writing the plaintiffs let a flat to G. The agreement include an absolute prohibition\r\nagainst G assigning, underletting or parting with possession of the flat or any part of it. In November\r\n1975 G wrote and informed the plaintiffs that he had vacated the flat on 22 September.', 'Diana Brahams Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-04-13', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6305, 'Morgan v Morgan', '', '../links/cases/Morgan v Morgan.pdf', 'Yes', 'E P Careless & Co., Jeffreys & Powell, Brecon', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Morgan v Morgan The father was a widower, aged 74, and his health was not good. He had one child, a married daughter\r\n(‘the wife’), who was granted a decree of divorce. She applied to the court for an order for a lump sum\r\nsettlement under s 23(1)(c) of the Matrimonial Cause Act 1973.', 'Christine Ivamy Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-12-21', 'FAMILY'),
(6306, 'MacShannon v Rockware Glass Ltd', '', '../links/cases/MacShannon v Rockware Glass Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Davies Arnold & Cooper., Robin Thompson and Partners., John L Williams', '1977', 'Appeal', 'MacShannon v Rockware Glass Ltd The plaintiff was a Scotsman who lived and worked in Scotland. He was employed by the defendants, a\r\nlimited company.', 'Sumra Green Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1977-02-16', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6307, 'Maharaj v Attorney General for Trinidad and Tobago', '', '../links/cases/Maharaj v Attorney General for Trinidad and Tobago.pdf', 'Yes', 'Gasters., Charles Russell & Co', '1976', 'High Court', 'Maharaj v Attorney General for Trinidad and Tobago On 2 April 1975 the appellant was engaged as counsel in a case in the Court of Appeal, Trinidad which\r\nwas estimated to last five days.', 'Mary Rose Plummer Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-10-11', 'ADMINSTRATION OF JUSTICE'),
(6308, 'Makins v Elson (Inspector of Taxes)', '', '../links/cases/Makins v Elson.pdf', 'Yes', 'Solicitor of Inland Revenue', '1976', 'Supreme', 'Makins v Elson (Inspector of Taxes) In July 1970 the taxpayer purchased for £1,800 a plot of land in respect of which planning permission for\r\na dwelling-house had already been granted. In August 1970 he moved on to the site with a caravan and\r\nlived there with his family.', 'Rengan Krishnan Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-10-18', 'TAXATION'),
(6309, 'Mardorf Peach & Co Ltd v Attica Sea Carriers Corporation of Liberia', '', '../links/cases/Mardorf Peach.pdf', 'Yes', 'Clyde & Co., Holman Fenwick & Willan', '1977', 'High Court', 'Mardorf Peach & Co Ltd v Attica Sea Carriers Corporation of Liberia The appellants were the owners of a ship which they chartered in January 1970 to the respondents on a\r\ntime charter.', 'Mary Rose Plummer Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1977-02-02', 'SHIPPING'),
(6310, 'Maynard v Osmond', '', '../links/cases/Maynard v Osmond.pdf', 'Yes', 'Bernard Sheridan & Co., Theodore Goddard & Co', '1976', 'High Court', 'Maynard v Osmond In November 1975 three young men were arrested and charged with being drunk and disorderly. At the\r\npolice station they recognised the plaintiff, who was one of the constables on duty, as an acquaintance.\r\nThe men were put into cells for the night.', 'Wendy Shockett Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-05-24', 'CRIMINAL'),
(6311, 'McDonnell v McDonnell', '', '../links/cases/McDonnell v McDonnell.pdf', 'Yes', 'Kennedy, Ponsonby & Prideaux., Charles Russell & Co.,Area Secretary Law Society No 13 Legal Aid Area', '1976', 'Appeal', 'McDonnell v McDonnell On the wife’s application for ancillary relief, following her divorce, the judge ordered the husband to pay\r\nthe wife a lump sum of £2,000 and periodical payments, and also ordered the husband to transfer to the\r\nwife his interest in the matrimonial home (originally acquired by the husband but subsequently\r\ntransferred into the parties’ joint names), subject to a fixed charge in the husband’s favour of £10,000,\r\nwhich represented one-third of the value of the house.', 'L I Zysman Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-04-12', 'ADMINSTRATION OF JUSTICE'),
(6312, 'Mehmet v Perry and another', '', '../links/cases/Mehmet v Perry and another.pdf', 'Yes', 'Penningtons., Hall, Grant & Co', '1976', 'High Court', 'Mehmet v Perry and another The plaintiff and his wife had five children under the age of 17. The two youngest children, H and S,\r\nsuffered from a rare blood disorder and as a result they had to be taken to hospital periodically to\r\nreceive blood transfusions; they also had to have daily injections which were administered at home by a\r\nnurse and had to be given tablets at home twice daily.', 'K Mydeen Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-03', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6313, 'Michael v Gowland', '', '../links/cases/Michael v Gowland.pdf', 'Yes', 'Ronald & Fletcher, Baker & Co', '1976', 'Supreme', 'Michael v Gowland On 15 October 1975 the applicant applied to justices for reduction of the amount payable by him under\r\nan affiliation order on the ground that his circumstances had changed since the order was made.', 'Georgina Chambers Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-30', 'ADMINSTRATION OF JUSTICE'),
(6314, 'Moeliker v A Reyrolle and Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Moeliker v A Reyrolle and Co Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'W H Thompson, Stanmore., Tilly Swangren & Co, Sunderland', '1976', 'High Court', 'Moeliker v A Reyrolle and Co Ltd In awarding damages for personal injury in a case where the plaintiff is still in employment at the date of\r\nthe trial, the court should only make an award for loss of earning capacity if there is a substantial or real,\r\nand not merely fanciful, risk that the plaintiff will lose his present employment at some time before the\r\nestimated end of his working life.', 'A S Virdi Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-01-30', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6315, 'Moore Properties (Ilford) Ltd v Mckeon and others', '', '../links/cases/Moore Properties.pdf', 'Yes', 'Shavin & Co., Windsor & Co', '1976', 'High Court', 'Moore Properties (Ilford) Ltd v Mckeon and others By an agreement in writing the plaintiffs let a flat to G. The agreement include an absolute prohibition\r\nagainst G assigning, underletting or parting with possession of the flat or any part of it. In November\r\n1975 G wrote and informed the plaintiffs that he had vacated the flat on 22 September.', 'Diana Brahams Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-04-30', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6316, 'Morgan v Morgan', '', '../links/cases/Morgan v Morgan.pdf', 'Yes', 'E P Careless & Co, Llandrindod Wells., Jeffreys & Powell, Brecon', '1976', 'High Court', 'Morgan v Morgan The father was a widower, aged 74, and his health was not good. He had one child, a married daughter\r\n(‘the wife’), who was granted a decree of divorce.', 'Christine Ivamy Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-12-21', 'FAMILY'),
(6317, 'Navy, Army and Air Force Institutes v Varley', '', '../links/cases/Navy.pdf', 'Yes', 'C R Seaman., Rowleys & Blewitts, Manchester', '1976', 'High Court', 'Navy, Army and Air Force Institutes v Varley', 'Salim H J Merali Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-10-20', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6318, 'Norfolk Capital Group Ltd v Kitway Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Norfolk Capital Group Ltd v Kitway Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Morris, Crisp & Co., Clintons', '1976', 'Supreme', 'Norfolk Capital Group Ltd v Kitway Ltd The tenants, a limited liability company, were the lessees of property under a lease which had 35 years\r\nto run.', 'Mary Rose Plummer Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-06-30', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6319, 'Northern Development (Holdings) Ltd and others v UDT Securities and others', '', '../links/cases/Northern Development.pdf', 'Yes', 'Ward Bowie., Nabarro Nathanson', '1975', 'Supreme', 'Northern Development (Holdings) Ltd and others v UDT Securities and others', 'Diana Brahams Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1975-03-26', 'LAND'),
(6320, 'Note Re H (infants) (adoption: parental consent)', '', '../links/cases/Note Re H.pdf', 'Yes', 'Crangle and Co, Sale., Hall, Brydon and Co, Manchester', '1977', 'Supreme', 'Note Re H (infants) (adoption: parental consent) The mother who was unmarried gave birth to twins on 20 January 1976. She was then aged about 20.\r\nHer own mother with whom she lived was unable to take the children into her home, and on leaving\r\nhospital the children were fostered.', 'L I Zysman Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1977-02-09', 'FAMILY'),
(6321, 'Nova (Jersey) Knit Ltd v Kammgarn Spinnerei GmbH', '', '../links/cases/Nova.pdf', 'Yes', 'Herbert Smith & Co., Herbert Oppenheimer, Nathan & Vandyk', '1977', 'High Court', 'Nova (Jersey) Knit Ltd v Kammgarn Spinnerei GmbH In 1969 the appellants, an English company, entered into an arrangement with the respondents, a\r\nGerman company, for the manufacture of fabric in Germany, where the respondents carried on\r\nbusiness.', 'Mary Rose Plummer Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1977-02-16', 'ADMINSTRATION OF JUSTICE'),
(6322, 'Ogden and others v Ardphalt Asphalt Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Ogden and others v Ardphalt Asphalt Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Blatchford., Pariser & Co, Manchester', '1976', 'High Court', 'Ogden and others v Ardphalt Asphalt Ltd By the terms of his employment the employee was guaranteed eight hours work a day, five days a week,\r\nie a 40 hour week, for which he was paid remuneration at an agreed basic hourly rate. The terms of\r\nemployment required him to do stated quantities of work in a normal eight hour period but also\r\nprovided that for extra work done over and above the stated quantities he would be paid extra\r\nproportionately to the extra work done', 'Salim H J Merali Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-07-21', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6323, 'Orakpo v Manson Investments Ltd and others', '', '../links/cases/Orakpo v Manson Investments Ltd and others.pdf', 'Yes', 'Lithman & Co', '1976', 'Supreme', 'Orakpo v Manson Investments Ltd and others The plaintiff, who was a property dealer, was anxious to obtain finance to enable him to complete the\r\npurchase of five separate properties (transactions 1–5) and to pay off existing mortgages on two other\r\nproperties which he already owned (transactions 6 and 7). He was introduced to the defendants who\r\nwere registered moneylenders.', 'Sumra Green Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-12-03', 'BANKING AND FINANCE'),
(6324, 'Owens v Brimmell', '', '../links/cases/Owens v Brimmell.pdf', 'Yes', 'Norman Morgan & Davies., Barkers', '1976', 'High Court', 'Owens v Brimmell The plaintiff and the defendant went out in the defendant’s car to spend an evening together drinking in\r\npublic houses. During the course of the evening they drank a considerable quantity of beer, much of it\r\nwithin a relatively short period before they started the journey home.', 'Gerald Price Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-04-14', 'TORTS'),
(6325, 'Pace (formerly Doe) v Doe', '', '../links/cases/Pace.pdf', 'Yes', 'Capstick-Dale and Partners, Romford., Kingsford, Dorman & Co', '1976', 'High Court', 'Pace (formerly Doe) v Doe The parties married in 1960 and had two children born in 1961 and 1963. In 1969 they separated by\r\nagreement and in 1971 the husband petitioned for divorce on the basis of two years’ separation. In June\r\n1972 an agreement was concluded under which the husband transferred to the wife a freehold house\r\nsubject to the existing mortgage and agreed to pay the mortgage repayments and maintenance of\r\n£12·50 per week for her and £2·50 per week for each of the children.', 'Georgina Chambers Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-06-16', 'FAMILY'),
(6326, 'Paul v Constance', '', '../links/cases/Paul v Constance.pdf', 'Yes', 'Elgoods, Cheltenham.,Oswald Hickson Collier & Co', '1976', 'High Court', 'Paul v Constance In June 1965 C and his wife, the defendant, separated. In 1967 C met the plaintiff and they commenced\r\nliving together as man and wife.', 'A S Virdi Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-07-08', 'TRUSTS'),
(6327, 'Peal Furniture Co Ltd v Adrian Share (Interiors) Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Peal Furniture Co Ltd v Adrian Share.pdf', 'Yes', 'Smith Roddam and Co, Bishop Auckland, Co Durham ., Nicholson, Martin and Wilkinson, Newcastle-upon-Tyne', '1976', 'High Court', 'Peal Furniture Co Ltd v Adrian Share (Interiors) Ltd On 19 September 1975 the plaintiff company commenced an action against the defendant company\r\nclaiming over £13,000 for goods supplied and services rendered in construction work at the defendants’\r\npremises which they contemplated opening for the sale of goods.', 'Mary Rose Plummer Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-12-14', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6328, 'Pearce (Inspector of Taxes) v Woodall-Duckham Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Pearce.pdf', 'Yes', 'Solicitor of Inland Revenue., McKenna & Co', '1976', 'High Court', 'Pearce (Inspector of Taxes) v Woodall-Duckham Ltd The taxpayer company, which was engaged on design and construction work under long term contracts,\r\ndecided to change its method of valuing work in progress from an on-cost basis to the accrued profit\r\nmethod of valuation, which was based on anticipated profits from work in progress.', 'Rengan Krishnan Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-26', 'TAXATION'),
(6329, 'Pedley v Inland Waterways Association Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Pedley v Inland Waterways Association Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Pollard, Thomas & Co', '1976', 'Supreme', 'Pedley v Inland Waterways Association Ltd The plaintiff was a member of the defendant company. On 29 October 1975 the plaintiff sent to the\r\ncompany a notice dated 23 October 1975.', 'Jacqueline Metcalfe Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-06-23', 'COMPANY'),
(6330, 'Pilgram v Rice-Smith and another', '', '../links/cases/Pilgram v Rice.pdf', 'Yes', 'Sharpe, Pritchard & Co agents for J V Bates, Norwich., Hawkins, Ferrier & Staveley, King’s Lynn', '1977', 'High Court', 'Pilgram v Rice-Smith and another The first defendant, who was employed at the meat counter of a supermarket, purported to sell to the\r\nsecond defendant, who was a customer and a friend of the first defendant, a quantity of sliced meat\r\nunder a fraudulent arrangement between the defendants whereby the price of the meat was\r\nunderstated on the wrapping paper.', 'Jacqueline Charles Barrister.', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '1977-03-10', 'CRIMINAL'),
(6331, 'Pryer v Smith', '', '../links/cases/Pryer v Smith.pdf', 'Yes', 'Kenwright & Cox agents for Young & Co, Braintree., Stanley Tee & Co, Bishop’s Stortford', '1976', 'High Court', 'Pryer v Smith On 16 August 1971 the plaintiff fell and sustained injuries whilst working for the defendant as a farm\r\nlabourer. On 8 August 1974 the plaintiff issued a writ against the defendant claiming damages for\r\nbreach of statutory duty and negligence.', 'Mary Rose Plummer Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-10', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6332, 'Quigley v Stokes', '', '../links/cases/Quigley v Stokes.pdf', 'Yes', 'Gregory, Rowcliffe & Co., John Tomlinson, St Helens', '1976', 'High Court', 'Quigley v Stokes The appellant took away a motor vehicle without the owner’s consent. Almost immediately after he had\r\ndriven the vehicle on to the road he collided with two other cars causing damage to them and also\r\ndamaging the stolen vehicle.', 'N P Metcalfe Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-20', 'CRIMINAL'),
(6333, 'R v Barrett (George)', '', '../links/cases/R v Barrett (George).pdf', 'Yes', 'Registrar of Criminal Appeals., Director of Public Prosecutions.', '1976', 'High Court', 'R v Barrett (George) In performing the duties of his office, an additional superintendent registrar of births, deaths and\r\nmarriages appointed pursuant to the provisions of the Registration Service Act 1953 is carrying out\r\nfunctions of the Crown and is therefore a ‘person serving under the Crown’, within s 1(3)a of the\r\nPrevention of Corruption Act 1906, even though he is not appointed, paid or liable to be dismissed by\r\nthe Crown. It follows, therefore, that an additional superintendent registrar is an ‘agent’ for the\r\npurposes of s 1(1) of the 1906 Act, which makes it an offence for an agent, inter alia, corruptly to accept\r\na gift or consideration as an inducement or reward for doing an act in relation to his principal’s affairs', 'N P Metcalfe Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-04-12', 'CRIMINAL'),
(6334, 'R v Briggs', '', '../links/cases/R v Briggs.pdf', 'Yes', 'Gepp and Sons, Chelmsford., Solicitor, Essex Police Authority.', '1976', 'High Court', 'R v Briggs On 15 September 1975 the applicant, Basil Ian Briggs, was convicted in the Crown Court at Chelmsford\r\nbefore R T L Lee sitting as a deputy circuit judge of criminal damage, contrary to s 1(1) of the Criminal\r\nDamage Act 1971.', 'Sepala Munasinghe Esq Barrister', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-03-30', 'CRIMINAL'),
(6335, 'R v Bundy', '', '../links/cases/R v Bundy.pdf', 'Yes', 'Registrar of Criminal Appeals.', '1977', 'Supreme', 'R v Bundy For some weeks the appellant had been ‘living rough’ in a motor car, travelling around in it from place to\r\nplace. In consequence of a complaint to the police by a woman who was collecting money from public\r\nhouses that she was being followed by some men in a car, the police stopped the appellant’s car and\r\narrested him and his passenger.', 'Sepala Munasinghe Esq Barrister', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '1977-03-03', 'CRIMINAL'),
(6336, 'R v Cheltenham Justices, ex parte Secretary of State for Trade and another', '', '../links/cases/R v Cheltenham Justices.pdf', 'Yes', 'Treasury Solicitor., Robinsons, Cheltenham', '1976', 'High Court', 'R v Cheltenham Justices, ex parte Secretary of State for Trade and another T, a Department of Trade inspector, and another inspector carried out an investigation under s 165 of\r\nthe Companies Act 1948 into the affairs of a company. Transcripts of the sworn evidence of witnesses at\r\nthe investigation were made, and each witness was given a copy of the transcript of his evidence. T and\r\nthe other inspector made a report on the investigation to the Department of Trade. The report resulted\r\nin the respondent, a director of the company, who had been a witness at the investigation, being\r\ncharged with a number of criminal offences.', 'Jacqueline Charles Barrister.', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-05-27', 'CRIMINAL'),
(6337, 'R v Chief Immigration Officer, Heathrow Airport and another, ex parte Salamat Bibi', '', '../links/cases/R v Chief Immigration Officer.pdf', 'Yes', 'Clifford Watts, Compton and Co., Treasury Solicitor.', '1976', 'High Court', 'R v Chief Immigration Officer, Heathrow Airport and another, ex parte Salamat Bibi This was an appeal by the applicant, Salamat Bibi, against the judgment of the Divisional Court of the\r\nQueen’s Bench Division (Lord Widgery CJ, Thompson and Kenneth Jones JJ) on 9 April 1976 dismissing\r\nthe applicant’s application (i) for an order of certiorari to remove to that court and quash the refusal of\r\nleave to enter given to the applicant and her two children by an immigration officer at Heathrow Airport\r\non 13 March 1976 and (ii) for an order of mandamus directed to the immigration officer and/or the\r\nSecretary of State for the Home Department to reconsider the refusal of leave and/or to admit the\r\napplicant and her two children to the United Kingdom.', 'Wendy Shockett Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-05-11', 'IMMIGRATION'),
(6338, 'R v Criminal Injuries Compensation Board, ex parte Tong', '', '../links/cases/R v Criminal Injuries Compensation Board.pdf', 'Yes', 'J G Haley.,Treasury Solicitor.', '1976', 'High Court', 'R v Criminal Injuries Compensation Board, ex parte Tong In April 1970 the deceased was the victim of a criminal assault in consequence of which he suffered\r\npersonal injuries.', 'Wendy Shockett Barrister', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-06-14', 'CRIMINAL'),
(6339, 'R v Croydon and South West London Rent Tribunal, ex parte Ryzewska', '', '../links/cases/R v Croydon and South West London Rent Tribunal.pdf', 'Yes', 'Davies, Topping and Watkins., Treasury Solicitor.', '1976', 'Supreme', 'R v Croydon and South West London Rent Tribunal, ex parte Ryzewska', 'J H Fazan Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-07-28', 'ADMINSTRATION OF JUSTICE'),
(6340, 'R v Evans', '', '../links/cases/R v Evans.pdf', 'Yes', 'Registrar of Criminal Appeals.', '1976', 'Supreme', 'R v Evans In principle there is no objection to a court making a community service order under s 14(1)a of the\r\nPowers of Criminal Courts Act 1973 which is expressed to be consecutive to a community service order\r\nalready imposed on the same offender by another court. When, therefore, the circumstances make it\r\ndesirable, the second court may impose a further community service order consecutive to the first order\r\nprovided that the total amount of hours directed to be served does not in aggregate exceed the limit of\r\n240 hours prescribed by s 14(1) (see p 229 e to j, post).', 'N P Metcalfe Barrister.', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-01', 'CRIMINAL'),
(6341, 'R v Goodchild', '', '../links/cases/R v Goodchild.pdf', 'Yes', 'Donnelly & Elliott, Gosport., Director of Public Prosecutions.', '1977', 'High Court', 'R v Goodchild For material to come within the definition of ‘cannabis’ in s 37(1)a of the Misuse of Drugs Acts 1971, it\r\nmust be shown that it is part of the ‘flowering or fruiting tops’, of the cannabis plant, ie the floral\r\nstructure at the tip of the stems; it is not sufficient merely to show that the material is some part of the\r\nplant from above the ground from which cannabis resin can be extracted.', 'N P Metcalfe Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1977-01-13', 'CRIMINAL'),
(6342, 'R v Hayes', '', '../links/cases/R v Hayes.pdf', 'Yes', 'Hewitt, Woollacott & Chown., Registrar of Criminal', '1976', 'High Court', 'R v Hayes The important consideration for a judge in the exercise of his discretion to permit a child to give\r\nevidence on oath, is whether the child sufficiently appreciates the solemnity of the occasion and is\r\nsufficiently responsible to understand that taking an oath involves telling the truth, and the judge need\r\nnot be satisfied that the child is aware of the divine sanction of an oath.', 'Lea Josse Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-22', 'CRIMINAL'),
(6343, 'R v Immigration Appeal Tribunal, ex parte Mehmet', '', '../links/cases/R v Immigration Appeal Tribunal.pdf', 'Yes', 'Pollard & Co., Treasury Solicitor.', '1994', 'High Court', 'R v Immigration Appeal Tribunal, ex parte Mehmet The power conferred on the Secretary of State by s 18(1)(a)a of the Immigration Act 1971 to make\r\nregulations for written notice to be given to a person of an appealable decision taken in respect of him,\r\nis discretionary and therefore entitles the Secretary of State to make regulations which expressly\r\ndispense with the need to give written notice to a class of persons, namely persons whose addresses are\r\nunknown.', 'Lea Josse Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1994-10-15', 'IMMIGRATION'),
(6344, 'R v London Borough of Hounslow, ex parte Pizzey', '', '../links/cases/R v London Borough of Hounslow.pdf', 'Yes', 'Goodman, Derrick & Co., T J Simmons, Hounslow', '1976', 'High Court', 'R v London Borough of Hounslow, ex parte Pizzey The applicant was the director of an organisation concerned with the provision of refuges for women\r\nwhose husbands and male associates committed acts of violence on them so that they needed to seek\r\nrefuge elsewhere but had not the means to find themselves immediate suitable accommodation. The\r\napplicant applied to the local authority by letter for named premises to be registered as a common\r\nlodging-house and for herself to be registered as the keeper of the premises.', 'Lea Josse Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-10-26', 'HEALTH'),
(6345, 'R v Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate for South Westminster, ex parte Green', '', '../links/cases/R v Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate for South Westminster.pdf', 'Yes', 'Stollard & Limbrey', '1976', 'Supreme', 'R v Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate for South Westminster, ex parte Green On 27 November 1975 the applicant was convicted summarily of three offences. On the first offence the\r\napplicant was sentenced to a term of six months’ imprisonment and on the second and third offences he\r\nwas fined £250 and £100 respectively. The magistrate did not at that time fix a term of imprisonment in\r\ndefault of payment of the fines', 'J H Fazan Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-03-23', 'CRIMINAL'),
(6346, 'R v Mitchell', '', '../links/cases/R v Mitchell.pdf', 'Yes', 'McGoldrick and Co., Solicitor, Metropolitan Police', '1977', 'High Court', 'R v Mitchell Material which is part of the fruiting tops of the cannabis plant but which does not contain cannabis\r\nresin is not ‘cannabis’ within the definition in s 37(1)a of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, since it is those\r\nparts of the flowering or fruiting tops which contain cannabis resin which are within the mischief of the\r\n1971 Act. Accordingly, the clean seeds of the cannabis plant, ie seeds without the husks, are not within\r\nthe definition of ‘cannabis’ in s 37(1) even though the seeds are part of the fruiting tops of the plant,', 'N P Metcalfe Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1977-02-23', 'CRIMINAL'),
(6347, 'R v National Insurance Commissioner, ex parte Michael', '', '../links/cases/R v National Insurance Commissioner.pdf', 'Yes', 'Russell Jones & Walker., Solicitor, Department of Health and Social Security.', '1976', 'High Court', 'R v National Insurance Commissioner, ex parte Michael The appellant, a police constable, was selected to play football for his police force in a match against\r\nanother police force.', 'Gavin Gore-Andrews Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-26', 'SOCIAL SECURITY'),
(6348, 'R v Nicklin', '', '../links/cases/R v Nicklin.pdf', 'Yes', 'Registrar of Criminal AppealS., J M Simons, Thames Valley Police Authority', '1976', 'High Court', 'R v Nicklin The appellant was charged in a count of an indictment with handling stolen goods by dishonestly\r\nreceiving them, contrary to s 22(1)a of the Theft Act 1968. He pleaded not guilty to that charge but\r\nguilty to handling the goods by dishonestly assisting in their removal. Because the Crown did not wish to\r\naccept that latter charge, they did not amend the indictment to add a count charging handling the goods\r\nby assisting in their removal.', 'Sepala Munasinghe Esq Barrister', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-12', 'CRIMINAL'),
(6349, 'R v Parker', '', '../links/cases/R v Parker.pdf', 'Yes', 'Registrar of Criminal Appeals., Heckford, Norton & Co, Letchworth', '1976', 'High Court', 'R v Parker For the purpose of s 1(1)a of the Criminal Damage Act 1971, which makes it an offence, inter alia, to\r\ndamage property belonging to another ‘being reckless’ as to whether the property would be damaged, a\r\nperson is ‘reckless’ when he carries out a deliberate act closing his mind to the obvious fact that there is\r\nsome risk of damage resulting from that act; the deliberate closing of his mind is the equivalent of\r\nknowledge that there is risk of damage resulting from the act (see p 40 c to e, post).', 'N P Metcalfe Barrister.', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-06-17', 'CRIMINAL'),
(6350, 'R v Rashid', '', '../links/cases/R v Rashid.pdf', 'Yes', 'Registrar of Criminal Appeals., T V Edwards & Co', '1976', 'High Court', 'R v Rashid The appellant, a steward employed by British Rail, was about to board his train. He had with him his own\r\nbread and tomatoes and it was his intention to use those articles, and not British Rail bread and\r\ntomatoes, in making sandwiches and to sell the sandwiches to passengers and to pocket the proceeds\r\nhimself.', 'Lea Josse Barrister.', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-23', 'CRIMINAL'),
(6351, 'R v Rent Officer for Kensington and Chelsea, ex parte Noel', '', '../links/cases/R v Rent Officer for Kensington and Chelsea.pdf', 'Yes', 'Arnold, Fooks, Chadwick & Co., Treasury Solicitor.', '1976', 'High Court', 'R v Rent Officer for Kensington and Chelsea, ex parte Noel Application was made to a rent officer to register a fair rent for premises. The landlord wrote to the rent\r\nofficer contending that the premises were not subject to a tenancy but that he had granted a licence to\r\nuse the premises, the possession and occupation of which remained vested in himself. The rent officer\r\ninvited the solicitors for both parties to a consultation in the course of which each solicitor presented his\r\nclient’s viewpoint.', 'Jacqueline Charles Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-04', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6352, 'R v Stone', '', '../links/cases/R v Stone.pdf', 'Yes', 'Registrar of Criminal Appeals., Director of Public Prosecutions.', '1976', 'High Court', 'R v Stone The appellants, a man aged 67 who was of low average intelligence, partially deaf and almost blind and\r\nhis mistress, aged 43, who was ineffectual and inadequate, lived in a house in a village with the man’s\r\nmentally subnormal son.', 'Sepala Munasinghe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-21', 'CRIMINAL'),
(6353, 'R v Williams (Roy)', '', '../links/cases/R v Williams.pdf', 'Yes', 'Registrar of Criminal Appeals., R O M Lovibond', '1976', 'High Court', 'R v Williams (Roy) On 24 March 1976 the appellant appeared before the Crown Court to stand trial on an indictment. After\r\nhe had entered the dock and acknowledged his identity but before the indictment was put to him and\r\nhe was called on to plead to it, counsel for the Crown intervened to ask for an adjournment on the\r\nground that a prosecution witness, to whom the appellant’s counsel wished to put vital questions, was\r\ntoo ill to attend the trial.', 'N P Metcalfe Barrister.', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-17', 'CRIMINAL'),
(6354, 'Ramsey v Hartley and others', '', '../links/cases/Ramsey v Hartley and others.pdf', 'Yes', 'Hewitt, Woollacott & Chown., Speechly Bircham', '1977', 'High Court', 'Ramsey v Hartley and others On 18 May 1972 the plaintiff issued a writ against the defendant, a firm of accountants, claiming\r\ndamages for negligence in preparing the accounts of a company in reliance on which the plaintiff had\r\npurchased shares in the company and had thereby suffered loss.', 'Christine Ivamy Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1977-02-24', 'BANKRUPTCY'),
(6355, 'Ravenseft Properties Ltd v Director General of Fair Trading', '', '../links/cases/Ravenseft Properties Ltd v Director General of Fair Trading.pdf', 'Yes', 'Simmons and Simmons., Treasury Solicitor.', '1976', 'Supreme', 'Ravenseft Properties Ltd v Director General of Fair Trading (ii) Furthermore, although the covenants in the underleases which were to be performed by the sublessees\r\nwere negative in form, they were not ‘restrictions’ for the purposes of s 107(1) of the 1973 Act\r\nand art 3(1) of the 1976 order since the sub-lessees, on taking possession of the respective premises\r\nunder the underleases, could not be said to have given up any rights or freedoms which they had\r\npreviously had (see p 54 h, post); dicta of Willmer LJ in Re Automatic Telephone and Electric Co Ltd’s\r\nApplication [1963] 2 All ER at 307, of Lord Reid in Esso Petroleum Co Ltd v Harper’s Garage', 'H S Narulla Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-07-21', 'COMPETITION'),
(6356, 'Re Bailey (a bankrupt), ex parte the trustee of the bankrupt v Bailey', '', '../links/cases/Re Bailey.pdf', 'Yes', 'Parlett, Kent & Co agents for Bruce, Lance & Co, High Wycombe., Woolsey, Morris & Kennedy, Sidcup', '1976', 'High Court', 'Re Bailey (a bankrupt), ex parte the trustee of the bankrupt v Bailey The husband and wife married in 1950. Their only child, a son, was born in 1960. In 1963 the husband\r\nand wife acquired the matrimonial home which was conveyed to them on trust for sale for themselves\r\nas joint tenants.', 'Diana Brahams Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-10-11', 'BANKRUPTCY'),
(6357, 'Re Bellaglade Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Re Bellaglade Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Markbys., Phillip Ross, Elliston & Bieber', '1976', 'High Court', 'Re Bellaglade Ltd Under a distress warrant issued at the suit of a company’s landlord, distress was levied on the goods of\r\nthe company.', 'Evelyn M C Budd Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-07-28', 'COMPANY'),
(6358, 'Re Britford Common', '', '../links/cases/Re Britford Common.pdf', 'Yes', 'Letcher & Son', '1976', 'Supreme', 'Re Britford Common Britford Green (‘the land’) formed part of the Manor of Britford. The land and the lordship of the manor\r\nhad been in the same ownership throughout living memory. The land was unenclosed, uncultivated and\r\nhad lain open to the adjoining roads throughout living memory. The land was registered as common\r\nland under the Commons Registration Act 1965. The appellant, who was the owner of the land and the\r\nlord of the manor, objected to the registration.', 'Jacqueline Metcalfe Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-05-24', 'LAND'),
(6359, 'Re F (a minor) (publication of information)', '', '../links/cases/Re F (a minor) (publication of information).pdf', 'Yes', 'Simmons & Simmons., Oswald Hickson, Collier & Co., Official Solicitor.', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Re F (a minor) (publication of information) In 1975 F, a 15 year old girl, formed an association with R, a man of bad character, to which F’s parents\r\nobjected. F left home in consequence. On 16 February, on the parents’ application, F was made a\r\ntemporary ward of court until the hearing of the wardship summons on 18 February 1976, and an\r\ninterim injunction was granted restraining R from harbouring or communicating with F.', 'Wendy Shockett Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-10-14', 'ADMINSTRATION OF JUSTICE'),
(6360, 'Re K (minors) (wardship: care and control)', '', '../links/cases/Re K.pdf', 'Yes', 'Stunt & Son, Chelmsford.,  Frost, Madams & Co, Chelmsford', '1976', 'Supreme', 'Re K (minors) (wardship: care and control) The parents were married in 1969 and had a boy, born in 1971, and a girl, born in 1974. The father was a\r\nparish curate.', 'L I Zysman Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-02', 'FAMILY'),
(6361, 'Re Turnworth Down', '', '../links/cases/Re Turnworth Down.pdf', 'Yes', 'Paul Clayden', '1976', 'Supreme', 'Re Turnworth Down Under an enclosure award made pursuant to a private Act of Parliament of 1801 which stated that the\r\naward should be final and conclusive, unenclosed common land (‘the land’) was enclosed and allotted to\r\nthe lord of the manor subject to the award to occupiers of certain houses on the land of rights of\r\ncommon to cut furze for fuel.', 'Evelyn M C Budd Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-11', 'LAND'),
(6362, 'Re Wolverhampton Steel & Iron Co Ltd and others', '', '../links/cases/Re Wolverhampton Steel.pdf', 'Yes', 'Treasury Solicitor.', '1976', 'Supreme', 'Re Wolverhampton Steel & Iron Co Ltd and others F was the registered holder of shares in five companies. Some shares were registered in his name as\r\nabsolute beneficial owner and some as trustee. In 1945 all five companies were compulsorily wound up\r\nbut their names were not struck off the register of companies.', 'Jacqueline Metcalfe Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-10-20', 'COMPANY'),
(6363, 'Shell UK Ltd v Lostock Garage Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Shell UK Ltd v Lostock Garage Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Bristows, Cooke & Carpmael., Rowe & Maw.', '1976', 'High Court', 'Shell UK Ltd v Lostock Garage Ltd L, a private company, operated a garage. The garage was ‘tied’ to Shell under the terms of a solus\r\nagreement, made in 1955, between Shell and L which required L to sell only petrol which had been\r\nsupplied by Shell.', 'Gavin Gore-Andrews Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-06-30', 'COMPETITION'),
(6364, 'Simmons v Hoover Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Simmons v Hoover Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Brian Thompson., C W Williams, Hayes', '1976', 'Supreme', 'Simmons v Hoover Ltd The appellant had been employed by the respondents since 1964. Together with his fellow employees,\r\nhe took part in a strike which started on 10 October 1974. Whilst still on strike, the appellant was\r\ndismissed by the respondents by a letter dated 27 December. The reason given for his dismissal was the\r\nneed to ‘reduce the labour force’.', 'Salim H J Merali Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-07-19', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6365, 'Simmons v Pizzey', '', '../links/cases/Simmons v Pizzey.pdf', 'Yes', 'Goodman, Derrick & Co., T J Simmons, Houslow', '1977', 'High Court', 'Simmons v Pizzey The appellant was the occupier of a house which she maintained as a place of temporary refuge for\r\nwomen who were being ill-treated by their husbands or other men with whom they were living. The\r\npopulation of the house was, in consequence, a fluctuating one, women arriving, with or without\r\nchildren, and leaving each day or each week.', 'Mary Rose Plummer Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1977-05-12', 'HOUSING'),
(6366, 'Sorbie v Trust Houses Forte Hotels Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Sorbie v Trust Houses Forte Hotels Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Harris and Cartwright, Slough., Paisner and Co', '1976', 'High Court', 'Sorbie v Trust Houses Forte Hotels Ltd During 1975 the female employees were employed as waitresses in a hotel restaurant. A waiter was also\r\nemployed in the restaurant. The work done by the waitresses was the same as that done by the waiter\r\nbut the waitresses were paid 85p an hour and the waiter was paid 97 1/2p an hour.', 'Salim H J Merali Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-10-12', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6367, 'Sovmots Investments Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment and Others', '', '../links/cases/Sovmots Investments Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment and Others.pdf', 'Yes', 'Goodman, Derrick & Co.,Treasury Solicitor.,B H Wilson, Solicitor and Town Clerk to Camden Council', '1977', 'Appeal', 'Sovmots Investments Ltd v Secretary of State for the Environment and Others The first appellants were the head lessees for a term of 150 years of a complex of buildings in central\r\nLondon which consisted of three main parts.', 'Mary Rose Plummer Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1977-03-23', 'HOUSING'),
(6368, 'Spackman v Secretary of State for the Environment and another', '', '../links/cases/Spackman v Secretary of State for the Environment and another.pdf', 'Yes', 'Hewitt, Woollacott & Chown., Collyer- Bristow & Co., Treasury Solicitor.', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Spackman v Secretary of State for the Environment and another In July 1948 the plaintiff and her husband were granted planning permission for the erection of a\r\ndwelling-house on land in Wiltshire.', 'K Mydeen Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-10-19', 'TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING'),
(6369, 'Stafford Borough Council v Elkenford Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Stafford Borough Council v Elkenford Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Joelson, Wilson and Co.,Solicitor, Stafford Borough Council.', '1976', 'High Court', 'Stafford Borough Council v Elkenford Ltd In contravention of the Shops Act 1950 a company held a market each Sunday on land which it owned.\r\nThe market was conducted by letting pitches on the land to stallholders. The company attempted to\r\ndisguise the nature of the operation by the device of a so-called club.', 'Gavin Gore-Andrews Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-07-30', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6370, 'Starr v National Coal Board', '', '../links/cases/Starr v National Coal Board.pdf', 'Yes', 'Hopkin & Sons, Mansfield., J G Tyrrell, Nottingham', '1976', 'High Court', 'Starr v National Coal Board In October 1974 the plaintiff brought an action against the defendants for damages for personal injuries\r\nwhich he asserted had been suffered during the course of his employment with the defendants. The\r\nstatement of claim alleged that he had not been provided with any support equipment when using a\r\nmachine and as a result his arms and elbows had come under severe strain.', 'A S Virdi Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-10-08', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6371, 'Surrendra Overseas Ltd v Government of Sri Lanka', '', '../links/cases/Surrendra Overseas Ltd v Government of Sri Lanka.pdf', 'Yes', 'Richards Butler & Co., Hatchett Jones & Kidgell', '1976', 'High Court', 'Surrendra Overseas Ltd v Government of Sri Lanka By a charterparty dated 29 March 1968 the owners chartered their vessel to the charterers for a voyage\r\nfrom Basrah to one or two ports in Ceylon for the carriage of a cargo of bitumen. The charterparty\r\nprovided that any dispute concerning it should be referred to arbitration in London. The vessel arrived at\r\nColombo in June 1968 and discharged the cargo.', 'K Mydeen Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-26', 'ADMINSTRATION OF JUSTICE'),
(6372, 'Terry v East Sussex County Council', '', '../links/cases/Terry v East Sussex County Council.pdf', 'Yes', 'Mayo & Perkins, Eastbourne., Solicitor, East Sussex County Council', '1976', 'High Court', 'Terry v East Sussex County Council The appellant was employed by a local authority on a fixed term contract for a period of 12 months as a\r\nlecturer at a college managed by the authority. The terms of the appellant’s employment were set out in\r\na letter from the college which the appellant signed.', 'Salim H J Merali Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-07-28', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6373, 'Town Investments Ltd and others v Department of the Environment', '', '../links/cases/Town Investments Ltd and others v Department of the Environment.pdf', 'Yes', 'Treasury Solicitor., Beachcroft, Hyman Isaacs', '1977', 'High Court', 'Town Investments Ltd and others v Department of the Environment In 1952 underleases of two buildings, for terms of 21 years expiring on 25 December 1972, were granted\r\nto the Minister of Works, including his ‘successors’ and ‘assigns’, ‘for and on behalf of Her Majesty’. In\r\nNovember 1970 the Secretary of State for the Environment succeeded to the property, rights and\r\nliabilities of the Minister of Works and became, ‘for and on behalf of Her Majesty’, the lessee under the\r\nunderleases.', 'Mary Rose Plummer Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1977-03-02', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6374, 'Treloar v Nute', '', '../links/cases/Treloar v Nute.pdf', 'Yes', 'Thrall, Llewllyn & Pearce, Truro', '1976', 'Supreme', 'Treloar v Nute The plaintiff was the freehold owner of a plot of land. The eastern part of the plot (‘the disputed land’)\r\nwas derelict and there was no evidence that the plaintiff intended to put it to any specific future use.', 'L I Zysman Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-06-07', 'LAND'),
(6375, 'Trendtex Trading Corporation Ltd v Central Bank of Nigeria', '', '../links/cases/Trendtex Trading Corporation Ltd v Central Bank of Nigeria.pdf', 'Yes', 'Theodore Goddard & Co., Hedleys, Botterell, Roche & Temperley', '1977', 'High Court', 'Trendtex Trading Corporation Ltd v Central Bank of Nigeria By a Nigerian statute of 1958 the Central Bank of Nigeria (‘the bank’) was established as a separate legal\r\nentity. It was modelled on the Bank of England. The bank had governmental functions in that it issued\r\nlegal tender; safeguarded the international value of the currency and acted as banker and financial\r\nadviser to the Nigerian government and the states within the Nigerian Federation.', 'Sumra Green Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1977-01-13', 'INTERNATIONAL'),
(6376, 'Union of India v Manohar Lal Narang and another', '', '../links/cases/Union of India v Manohar Lal Narang and another.pdf', 'Yes', 'Stocken and Co., Polden Bishop Gale., Director of Public Prosecutions', '1976', 'Appeal', 'Union of India v Manohar Lal Narang and another In 1967 two antique pillars were stolen from a temple in India. The pillars were recovered and lodged at\r\na police station. In March 1968 one Malik obtained the release of the pillars on the pretext that he\r\nrequired them, temporarily, for archaeological study.', 'Mary Rose Plummer Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-26', 'INTERNATIONAL'),
(6377, 'United Overseas Bank v Jiwani', '', '../links/cases/United Overseas Bank v Jiwani.pdf', 'Yes', 'Simmons & Simmons., Gerard Hales & Co', '1976', 'High Court', 'United Overseas Bank v Jiwani In 1969 the defendant opened a bank account with the plaintiffs in Geneva. At the end of August 1972\r\nthe balance of the account stood at, approximately, $10,000.', 'Christine Ivamy Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-03-31', 'BANKING AND FINANCE'),
(6378, 'United Scientific Holdings Ltd v Burnley Borough Council', '', '../links/cases/United Scientific Holdings Ltd v Burnley Borough Council.pdf', 'Yes', 'Turner Peacock., Stephenson Harwood & Tatham., Fremont & Co', '1977', 'Supreme', 'United Scientific Holdings Ltd v Burnley Borough Council Burnley Corporation granted a company (‘USH’) a lease of premises for a term of 99 years from 31\r\nAugust 1962. The lease provided that the rent would be £900 per annum for the first ten years of the\r\nterm and thereafter £1,000 per annum plus any additional rent payable under the provisions contained\r\nin the schedule to the lease.', 'Mary Rose Plummer Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1977-03-23', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6379, 'W Devis & Sons Ltd v Atkins', '', '../links/cases/W Devis.pdf', 'Yes', 'R A Roberts', '1976', 'Supreme', 'W Devis & Sons Ltd v Atkins The employers dismissed an employee because they had become dissatisfied with his work and with the\r\nfact that he appeared to be unable to adapt himself to the wishes of the employers on matters of basic\r\nprinciple.', 'A S Virdi Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-10-26', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6380, 'Waddington v Leicester Council for Voluntary Services', '', '../links/cases/Waddington v Leicester Council for Voluntary Services.pdf', 'Yes', 'Solicitor, National Council for Civil Liberties., Salusbury & Co, Leicester', '1975', 'Supreme', 'Waddington v Leicester Council for Voluntary Services A female employee was employed as a community worker on a community project. She was paid in\r\naccordance with a salary scale relating to community workers which had been negotiated nationally.\r\nSubsequently the employers employed a male employee as a playleader on the project. He was paid in\r\naccordance with a different salary scale, relating to playleaders, which had also been negotiated\r\nnationally.', 'Salim H J Merali Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1975-12-15', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6381, 'Wales v Wadham', '', '../links/cases/Wales v Wadham.pdf', 'Yes', 'Bevan, Hancock & Co, Bristol.,Fryer, Bennett & Co, Bristol', '1976', 'High Court', 'Wales v Wadham The husband and wife were married in 1945 and had a son and daughter. The husband bought the\r\nmatrimonial home which was conveyed into his sole name. In 1969 he formed an association with\r\nanother woman, T.', 'Georgina Chambers Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-06-25', 'FAMILY'),
(6382, 'Watts v Rubery Owen Conveyancer Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Watts v Rubery Owen Conveyancer Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Robin Thompson & Partners', '1976', 'Supreme', 'Watts v Rubery Owen Conveyancer Ltd The employee was employed at a depot which the employer closed down. The employee rejected the\r\nemployer’s offer to re-employ him at another depot and on 21 March 1975 terminated his employment,\r\nthe termination taking effect from that date.', 'Salim H J Merali Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-12-13', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6383, 'Wienand v Anderton (Inspector of Taxes)', '', '../links/cases/Wienand v Anderton.pdf', 'Yes', 'Solicitor of Inland Revenue', '1976', 'Supreme', 'Wienand v Anderton (Inspector of Taxes) On 1 January 1970, E Ltd, a company registered in Dublin, appointed the taxpayer as its managing\r\ndirector for a term of ten years.', 'Rengan Krishnan Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-02-16', 'TAXATION');
INSERT INTO `courtrulings` (`id`, `title`, `content`, `link`, `isshow`, `author`, `date`, `courttype`, `summary`, `presiding`, `casetype`, `subjectmatter`, `caseno`, `counsel1`, `counsel2`, `courtname`, `caseDate`, `subjectmattertitle`) VALUES
(6384, 'Williams v Williams', '', '../links/cases/Williams v Williams.pdf', 'Yes', 'Argles & Court, Maidstone', '1976', 'Supreme', 'Williams v Williams The husband, and wife were married in 1950 and had four children. In April 1970 they purchased a\r\nhouse for £7,275 which was conveyed into their joint names on trust for sale for themselves beneficially\r\nas tenants in common in equal shares.', 'Gavin Gore-Andrews Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-05-07', 'FAMILY'),
(6385, 'Willingale (Inspector of Taxes) v International Commercial Bank Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Willingale.pdf', 'Yes', 'Solicitors of Inland Revenue., Travers Smith, Braithwaite & Co', '1977', 'High Court', 'Willingale (Inspector of Taxes) v International Commercial Bank Ltd The taxpayer bank was incorporated in 1967 to provide medium-term finance in world markets to\r\ncommercial companies. At all material times, its business included the discounting of or the purchase of\r\ndiscounted bills issued by borrowers all over the world.', 'Rengan Krishnan Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1977-03-15', 'TAXATION'),
(6386, 'Willmott v Atack', '', '../links/cases/Willmott v Atack.pdf', 'Yes', 'Harveys., Solicitor, Metropolitan Police.', '1976', 'High Court', 'Willmott v Atack A police officer, acting in the execution of his duty, arrested a motorist who began to struggle. The\r\ndefendant, who knew the motorist, intervened between the officer and the motorist with the intention\r\nof assisting the officer by persuading the motorist not to resist.', 'N P Metcalfe Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-06-16', 'CRIMINAL'),
(6387, 'Wilson v Arnott', '', '../links/cases/Wilson v Arnott.pdf', 'Yes', 'Prentis, Seagrove & Co., Clayton & Co, Luton', '1976', 'High Court', 'Wilson v Arnott The appellant was delivering goods to premises in a street in Luton which was a designated parking\r\nplace within art 4a of the Parking Places and Restriction of Waiting and Loading (Luton) (No 1) Order\r\n1964b (‘the order’) and was provided with parking bays controlled by parking meters. The appellant\r\nparked his vehicle in a parking bay which had been suspended from use, pursuant to art 23(1) and (2)c\r\nof the order, by a hood placed over the meter.', 'Lea Josse Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1976-11-01', 'TRANSPORT'),
(6388, 'A L Sturge & Co v Excess Insurance Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/A L Sturge.pdf', 'Yes', 'William Charles Crocker., Linklaters & Paines', '1938', 'Supreme', 'A L Sturge & Co v Excess Insurance Co Ltd The claimants effected policies of insurance in relation to bonds issued by provinces of the Dominion of Canada containing a gold clause and an option to claim payment either in Canadian or in United States dollars. Payments were made upon surrender of coupons or bearer bonds, and payment had been made in paper dollars.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-15', 'INSURANCE'),
(6389, 'American Chain & Cable Co Inc v Hall’s Barton Ropery Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/American Chain.pdf', 'Yes', 'Lovell White & King., Vizard Oldham Crowder & Cash', '1938', 'Supreme', 'American Chain & Cable Co Inc v Hall’s Barton Ropery Co Ltd In an action for damages for the infringement of letters patent, the plaintiffs applied for leave to inspect the machines of the defendants which made the alleged infringing article. The expert evidence before the court was conflicting, but showed that the article could be made with or without infringement.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-10-19', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6390, 'Anderson (Sir Alan Garrett) v Inland Revenue Commissioners', '', '../links/cases/Anderson.pdf', 'Yes', 'Parker Garrett & Co., Solicitor of Inland Revenue', '1938', 'High Court', 'Anderson (Sir Alan Garrett) v Inland Revenue Commissioners A voluntary transfer of a mortgage upon which the sum of £4,937 17s was outstanding, together with current interest amounting to £95 9s 1d, making a total sum secured of £5,033 6s 1d, was assessed to stamp duty at ad valorem conveyance duty upon the sum of £5,033 6s 1d, the value of the property transferred.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-11', 'TAXATION'),
(6391, 'Attorney-General (at the relation of Rochdale Corporation) v Rochdale Canal Co', '', '../links/cases/Attorney.pdf', 'Yes', 'Sharpe Pritchard & Co., Winter & Co', '1938', 'High Court', 'Attorney-General (at the relation of Rochdale Corporation) v Rochdale Canal Co A canal company supplied a railway company at two points with water for the purpose of raising steam in the latter company’s locomotive engines.', 'Maurice Share Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-24', 'TRANSPORT'),
(6392, 'B G Utting & Co Ltd v Hughes', '', '../links/cases/B G Utting.pdf', 'Yes', 'Royds Rawstorne & Co., Solicitor of Inland Revenue', '1938', 'High Court', 'B G Utting & Co Ltd v Hughes The appellant company carried on the business of speculative builders, building houses upon land owned by them, and, upon the completion of the building, disposing of some of the houses by granting a 99-years’ lease in consideration of a premium paid in cash and the reservation of a ground rent.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-08', 'TAXATION'),
(6393, 'Bailey v Geddes', '', '../links/cases/Bailey v Geddes.pdf', 'Yes', 'Solicitor to the London Passenger Transport Board., Gardiner & Co', '1938', 'High Court', 'Bailey v Geddes The action in this case was brought by the father of a lad of 15 years of age, suing for himself for expenses, and on behalf of his son for damages for personal injuries caused by a collision on the pedestrian crossing at the east end of Fleet Street with an omnibus belonging to the defendant board on 8 March 1937.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-12-20', 'TRANSPORT'),
(6394, 'Batty v Lee', '', '../links/cases/Batty v Lee.pdf', 'Yes', 'Warwick Williams & Marchants', '1938', 'Supreme', 'Batty v Lee The respondent was charged under the Vagrancy Act 1824, with having unlawfully run away from a certain parish and left his wife and child, then under 16 years of age, whereby they became chargeable to the local public assistance committee.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-10-20', 'CRIMINAL LAW '),
(6395, 'Baxter v F W Gapp & Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Baxter v F W Gapp.pdf', 'Yes', 'Barnard Taylor & Douglas-Mann., Nordon & Co', '1938', 'High Court', 'Baxter v F W Gapp & Co Ltd The defendant, an estate agent, was sued for negligence in making a valuation of property for the purpose of an advance by way of mortgage.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-10-16', 'TORTS'),
(6396, 'Brighty v Pearson', '', '../links/cases/Brighty v Pearson.pdf', 'Yes', 'Amery-Parkes & Co., Field Roscoe & Co', '1938', 'High Court', 'Brighty v Pearson The appellant was charged with having unlawfully driven a motor lorry at a speed greater than the maximum speed specified for a vehicle of that class or description in the Road Traffic Act 1934, Sched I, contrary to the Road Traffic Act 1930, s 10(1).', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-10-24', 'CRIMINAL LAW '),
(6397, 'British Industrial Plastics Ltd v Ferguson', '', '../links/cases/British Industrial Plastics Ltd v Ferguson.pdf', 'Yes', 'Crane & Hawkins., Charles G Bradshaw & Waterson', '1938', 'High Court', 'British Industrial Plastics Ltd v Ferguson The defendant D had been employed by the plaintiffs for many years. In 1932, he left their employ, and thereafter entered into a leaving agreement with them whereby he undertook, inter alia, until 31 March 1934, not to interest himself directly or indirectly in the manufacture or sale of certain chemicals which were used in a secret process of the plaintiffs.', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-24', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6398, 'British Thomson-Houston Co Ltd v Tungstalite Ltd', '', '../links/cases/British Thomson.pdf', 'Yes', 'Bristows Cooke & Carpmael., Aird Hood & Co', '1938', 'High Court', 'British Thomson-Houston Co Ltd v Tungstalite Ltd In an action for damages for the infringement of letters patent, the plaintiffs made an application that, instead of directions under RSC Ord 53A, r 21A(2)(d) being given in the customary form, they should either deliver to the defendants a list of experiments on which they intended to rely upon the issue of infringement or else give notice that they did not intend to rely upon any such experiments', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-10-18', 'INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY'),
(6399, 'Briton Ferry Steel Co Ltd v Barry', '', '../links/cases/Briton Ferry Steel Co Ltd v Barry.pdf', 'Yes', 'Ingledew Sons & Brown., Solicitor of Inland Revenue', '1938', 'High Court', 'Briton Ferry Steel Co Ltd v Barry The appellant company until 1934 was mainly concerned with the manufacture of steel bars, and the conversion of these bars into blackplate and tinplate was carried out by subsidiary companies. The whole share capital of these subsidiary companies was owned by the appellant company.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-04', 'TAXATION'),
(6400, 'Burns v Burns', '', '../links/cases/Burns v Burns.pdf', 'Yes', '', '1938', 'High Court', 'Burns v Burns The appellant was granted letters of administration of the estate of his brother Dominic Burns, who died in 1933, intestate and without issue, and domiciled in British Columbia. James Francis Burns, a nephew of the deceased Dominic Burns and the husband of the respondent, thereupon became entitled to a share of the estate.', 'T A Dillon Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-17', 'COMMONWEALTH'),
(6401, 'Bush v Bush', '', '../links/cases/Bush v Bush.pdf', 'Yes', 'Edgar H Hiscocks', '1938', 'Supreme', 'Bush v Bush A husband deserted his wife on 5 December 1933. On 5 June 1936, exactly 2½ years after the date of the desertion, the wife presented a petition for divorce founded on adultery.', 'J F Compton Miller Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-30', 'FAMILY'),
(6402, 'Carpenter v Ebblewhite', '', '../links/cases/Carpenter v Ebblewhite.pdf', 'Yes', 'Arnold Carter & Co., A D Vandamm & Co', '1938', 'High Court', 'Carpenter v Ebblewhite The plaintiffs had been injured by a motor car driven by the defendant B. It was in dispute whether the defendant E had sold the car to B, or whether B was driving it as his agent. The plaintiffs obtained leave to add E’s insurance company as a defendant.', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-10-18', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6403, 'Caxton Publishing Co Ltd v Sutherland Publishing Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Caxton Publishing Co Ltd v Sutherland Publishing Co Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Oswald Hickson Collier & Co., White & Leonard & Nicholls & Co', '1938', 'High Court', 'Caxton Publishing Co Ltd v Sutherland Publishing Co Ltd In an action for an alleged infringement of the plaintiffs’ copyright in a certain publication, the plaintiffs claimed, inter alia, an inquiry as to (i) damages suffered by reason of the infringement, and (ii) damages for conversion.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-17', 'INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY'),
(6404, 'Chappell v Chappell', '', '../links/cases/Chappell v Chappell.pdf', 'Yes', 'Kimbers Williams Sweetland & Stinson., Ernest A Kite', '1938', 'Supreme', 'Chappell v Chappell The Matrimonial Causes Act 1937, s 9, gives a party against whom a decree nisi has been given a right to apply to have that decree made absolute after the expiration of 3 months from the earliest date on which the party obtaining the decree could have made such an application.', 'J F Compton Miller Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-10-19', 'FAMILY'),
(6405, 'Chung Chi Cheung v R', '', '../links/cases/Chung Chi Cheung v R.pdf', 'Yes', 'Webster Butcher & Sons., Harry Chandler', '1938', 'High Court', 'Chung Chi Cheung v R The appellant, a cabin boy on board the Cheung Keng, an armed customs cruiser in the service of the republic of China, shot and killed the captain of the cruiser, seriously wounded the chief officer, and finally shot and wounded himself.', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-12-02', 'CRIMINAL LAW '),
(6406, 'Clay Hill Brick & Tile Co Ltd v Rawlings', '', '', 'Yes', '', ' 193', 'Supreme', '', '', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-10-19', 'COMPANY'),
(6407, 'Clay Hill Brick & Tile Co Ltd v Rawlings', '', '../links/cases/Clay Hill Brick.pdf', 'Yes', 'Thorp Saunders & Thorp., Maude & Tunnicliffe', '1938', 'High Court', 'Clay Hill Brick & Tile Co Ltd v Rawlings The defendant purchased bricks from the plaintiff company, dealing at all times with a person, B, who was in fact the chairman of the directors of the company and acting as managing director thereof, though, in fact, he had not been properly appointed to that office.', 'Gerald Abrahams Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-10-19', 'COMPANY'),
(6408, 'Cole v Young', '', '../links/cases/Cole v Young.pdf', 'Yes', 'Metcalfe Copeman & Pettefar', '1938', 'Supreme', 'Cole v Young The appellant’s motor lorry became involved in an accident with another motor lorry driven in the opposite direction. After the accident, the brakes of the appellant’s lorry were tested, and it was found that they were not maintained in good and efficient working order.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-10-14', 'CRIMINAL LAW '),
(6409, 'Cottingham’s Executors v Inland Revenue Commissioners', '', '../links/cases/Cottingham.pdf', 'Yes', '', '1938', 'Supreme', 'Cottingham’s Executors v Inland Revenue CommissionersThe Court of Appeal dismissed, with costs, an appeal in this case from the order made by Lawrence J, dated 5 July 1938. Sir Wilfrid Greene MR stated that he desired to adopt the judgment of Lawrence J, as it so completely covered the ground that it was unnecessary to say more.', '', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-30', 'TAXATION'),
(6410, 'Craig v Dover Navigation Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Craig v Dover Navigation Co Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Barnett Janner., Botterell & Roche', '1938', 'High Court', 'Craig v Dover Navigation Co Ltd The deceased had been employed as a sailor on a ship that was sent up a mosquito-infested river in West Africa. It was found that his death was due to yellow fever and/or malaria caused by mosquito bites.', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-28', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6411, 'Dalton v Adelphi Club Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Dalton v Adelphi Club Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Solicitor to the Metropolitan Police., Bernard Linder & Co', '1938', 'High Court', 'Dalton v Adelphi Club Ltd The respondents allowed a game called stud poker to be played upon their premises. This game is played by first dealing to each player one card face downwards, and then four cards face upwards. As each round of cards is dealt the player pays a stake into the pool or drops out of the game.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-10-29', 'LEISURE AND LICENSING'),
(6412, 'Daniels and Daniels v R White & Sons Ltd and Tarbard', '', '../links/cases/Daniels and Daniels v R White.pdf', 'Yes', 'Arthur Dollond & Co., Wm Webb & So.,  Crossman Block & Co', '1938', 'Appeal', 'Daniels and Daniels v R White & Sons Ltd and Tarbard A husband and wife sued the manufacturers and the retailer of a bottle of lemonade for damages for injuries received by reason of the fact that the bottle contained 38 grains of carbolic acid in addition to the lemonade. Both plaintiffs, in suing the manufacturers, relied upon the doctrine enunciated in M‘Alister (or Donoghue) v Stevenson.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-03', 'SALE OF GOODS'),
(6413, 'Dartford Brewery Co Ltd v Freeman', '', '../links/cases/Dartford Brewery Co Ltd v Freeman.pdf', 'Yes', 'Winch & Winch., Sprinz & Sons', '1938', 'High Court', 'Dartford Brewery Co Ltd v Freeman Upon a claim under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1927, for compensation for loss of goodwill in respect of licensed premises, it was proved that the tenant had increased the trade of the house by inducing a number of clubs to meet upon the premises, had worked up a considerable dining-room trade, but that during the time immediately before the determination of the lease the business had not progressed as rapidly as other neighbouring houses.', 'Maurice Share Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-10-14', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6414, 'Edgington, Bishop and Withy v Swindon Borough Council', '', '../links/cases/Edgington.pdf', 'Yes', 'Church Adams Tatham & Co., Sharpe Pritchard & Co', '1938', 'High Court', 'Edgington, Bishop and Withy v Swindon Borough Council The plaintiffs were the freeholder and leaseholders of two houses and a piece of vacant land between the two houses. Both the houses and the land abutted on the public highway, and immediately in front of the piece of vacant land the Swindon Corporation had erected a shelter for the use of persons intending to travel by buses owned by the corporation and by omnibus companies.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-10-20', 'LOCAL GOVERNMENT'),
(6415, 'Electric & Musical Industries Ltd v Lissen Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Electric.pdf', 'Yes', 'Broad & Son., Bentleys Stokes & Lawless', '1938', 'High Court', 'Electric & Musical Industries Ltd v Lissen Ltd Claim 1 of a patent was as follows: “In an amplifier circuit including an electric discharge tube wherein alternating current energy is relayed through the control action of a grid electrode upon an electron current in the vacuous space of the tube, the method of adjusting the transmission through said amplifier which comprises the steps of controlling by different amounts the portions of said electron stream flowing through different regions of said vacuous space by a special design of the tube electrodes, impressing upon said control grid a steady polarising voltage and adjusting said polarising voltage to a value substantially different from that at which the total electron current falls to zero.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-03', 'INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY'),
(6416, 'Evans v National Union of Printing, Bookbinding, and Paper Workers', '', '../links/cases/Evans v National Union of Printing.pdf', 'Yes', 'C Patrick B Knight., Pattinson & Brewer', '1938', 'High Court', 'Evans v National Union of Printing, Bookbinding, and Paper Workers The plaintiff, a member of the London Central branch of the defendant union, was expelled after inquiry by his union. The plaintiff was a casual jobbing hand in the employment of an important firm of printers and bookbinders.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-10-19', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6417, 'Fisher v W B Dick & Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Fisher v W B Dick.pdf', 'Yes', 'Percy Bono & Griffith., Linklaters & Paines', '1938', 'High Court', 'Fisher v W B Dick & Co Ltd The plaintiff entered the employment of the defendants in 1933. The managing director of the defendant company confirmed his appointment on the selling staff as and from 1 December 1933, at a commencing salary of £400 per annum plus out-of-pocket and travelling expenses. Evidence was given on behalf of the plaintiff that in the oil blending and vending trade a salesman was entitled to 3 months’ notice, and on the part of the defendants it was stated that nobody under the grade of a director was entitled to more than 3 months’ notice.', 'Maurice Share Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-21', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6418, 'Fox v Marshall', '', '../links/cases/Fox v Marshall.pdf', 'Yes', 'Webster Butcher & Sons., Harry Chandler', '1938', 'High Court', 'Fox v Marshall In 1928, a landlord obtained possession of a dwelling-house, which thereupon became decontrolled. He then subdivided it into two, without any structural alterations. The rateable value of the whole house was at all material times over £20 and that of each half under that value, the house being within the metropolitan police area. Upon the coming into force of the 1933 Act, no application was made to register either half of the house as decontrolled.', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-12-12', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6419, 'Gillett v Kent Rivers Catchment Board', '', '../links/cases/Gillett v Kent Rivers Catchment Board.pdf', 'Yes', 'A Kramer & Co., Field Roscoe & Co', '1938', 'High Court', 'Gillett v Kent Rivers Catchment Board The plaintiffs were owners and occupiers respectively of certain land in a district for which the defendants were the drainage board. Owing, it was alleged, to the defendants’ failure to keep the sewers in a fit and proper condition, and mainly failure to clear a drain of weeds, the plaintiffs’ lands were flooded and they suffered damage to their crops.', 'F Honig Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-12-01', 'TORTS'),
(6420, 'Gillmore v London County Council', '', '../links/cases/Gillmore v London County Council.pdf', 'Yes', 'W B Blackwell & Co., J R Howard Roberts', '1938', 'High Court', 'Gillmore v London County Council The plaintiff had joined a class in physical training organised by the defendant council, and had paid a small fee upon joining. The exercises were performed in a hall which was used for dances and of which the floor was fairly highly polished.', 'Maurice Share Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-07', 'EDUCATION'),
(6421, 'Greenwood v Atherton', '', '../links/cases/Greenwood v Atherton.pdf', 'Yes', 'Tylee & Co.,Eric G Floyd.,Norton Rose Greenwell', '1938', 'High Court', 'Greenwood v Atherton The plaintiff, an infant, was injured at school during an authorised recreation period by the swinging to of a pair of iron gates, which crushed his hand. The accident happened on 8 April 1937, and on 10 November 1937, more than 6 months later, a writ was issued against the defendants, who were respectively headmistress and managers of the school, claiming damages for breach of duty.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-12-06', 'LOCAL GOVERNMENT'),
(6422, 'Rousou v Photi (Gort Estates Co, Third Party)', '', '../links/cases/Rousou v Photi.pdf', 'Yes', 'Leonard Kasler; Walfords', '1939', 'High Court', 'Rousou v Photi (Gort Estates Co, Third Party) A part of a house was let to the defendant at 17s 6d per week. The corresponding annual rent would be £45 10s. The landlord paid all rates and taxes, which admittedly amounted to more than £5 10s. The defendant sub-let one room to the plaintiff, who was injured by a fall of the ceiling in that room.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-12-15', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6423, 'Sharp v Avery and Kerwood', '', '../links/cases/Sharp v Avery and Kerwood.pdf', 'Yes', 'Berrymans (for the appellant); A H Hepburn (for the respondent).', '1938', 'High Court', 'Sharp v Avery and Kerwood The plaintiff was riding on the pillion of the third party’s motor cycle. The defendant, who was also riding a motor cycle, had agreed to lead them, as he was familiar with the road. At a left-hand bend, the defendant drove straight ahead off the road on to a piece of waste land', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-10-21', 'TORTS'),
(6424, 'Sidery v Evans and Peters', '', '../links/cases/Sidery v Evans and Peters.pdf', 'Yes', 'Treasury Solicitor', '1938', 'Supreme', 'Sidery v Evans and Peters The respondents were respectively charged with unlawfully using and causing to be used a motor vehicle as an express carriage otherwise than under a road service licence, in contravention of the Road Traffic Act 1930, s 72(1), (10).', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '0000-00-00', 'CRIMINAL LAW '),
(6425, 'Smith v Cawdle Fen, Ely (Cambridge), Commissioners', '', '../links/cases/Smith v Cawdle Fen.pdf', 'Yes', 'Gibson & Weldon., Pickering Kenyon & Co', '1938', 'Supreme', 'Smith v Cawdle Fen, Ely (Cambridge), Commissioners The plaintiff’s lands were in 1937 severely damaged by reason of floods. It was alleged that the damage was due to the failure of the defendants to keep in good repair the drainage works within their area. The main and substantial cause of the flooding was that a bank was too low. It was found that the dykes were kept reasonably clean and that the pumping system was as efficient as the defendants could make it, having regard to the funds at their disposal.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-10-19', 'LOCAL GOVERNMENT'),
(6426, 'Smith v Smith', '', '../links/cases/Smith v Smith.pdf', 'Yes', 'Edgar H Hiscocks., The King’s Proctor', '1939', 'High Court', 'Smith v Smith The petitioner was married to the respondent in 1922, but subsequently, owing to quarrels between them, the husband withdrew from cohabitation with the petitioner, but continued to live with his mother in another part of the same house.', 'J F Compton Miller Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-10-27', 'FAMILY'),
(6427, 'Sowler v Potter and Others', '', '../links/cases/Sowler v Potter and Others.pdf', 'Yes', 'Pinsent & Co., Bernard Simmonds & Co', '1939', 'High Court', 'Sowler v Potter and Others On 12 May 1938, the defendant, whose name was then Ann Robinson, was convicted of permitting disorderly conduct in a tea-room. On 4 July, by deed poll, she assumed the name of Ann Potter. However, on 16 June 1938, she had written to the plaintiff’s agent under the name of Ann Potter, offering to take a lease of certain premises belonging to the plaintiff, and on 4 August 1938, the plaintiff purported to lease these premises to the defendant for use as a restaurant or tea-room.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-11-23', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6428, 'Timins v Timins (by her Guardian)', '', '../links/cases/Timins v Timins.pdf', 'Yes', 'S A Bailey & Co', '1938', 'Supreme', 'Timins v Timins (by her Guardian) Petition for Dissolution of Marriage under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1937, s 2(d), on the ground of incurable unsoundness of mind. In this, the first petition under the above para (d), the patient had been continuously under care and treatment for a period of at least five years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition within the meaning of s 3 of the Act.', 'J F Compton Miller Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-05-24', 'FAMILY'),
(6429, 'Tomley and Others v Gower and McAdam', '', '../links/cases/Tomley and Others v Gower and McAdam.pdf', 'Yes', 'Marco Blumberg, Manchester., Timbrell Deighton & Nichols', '1939', 'High Court', 'Tomley and Others v Gower and McAdam In an application for leave to institute foreclosure proceedings against G and A, it appeared that G had mortgaged to the plaintiffs certain property with a registered title.', 'F Honig Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-11-30', 'LAND '),
(6430, 'United Towns Electric Co Ltd v Attorney-General for Newfoundland', '', '../links/cases/United Towns Electric Co Ltd v Attorney.pdf', 'Yes', 'Maddison Stirling Humm & Willett., Burn & Berridge', '1939', 'High Court', 'United Towns Electric Co Ltd v Attorney-General for Newfoundland The appellant company was incorporated in 1902, under a public Act for the purpose of supplying electricity in certain towns in Newfoundland. By s 30 of the Act, the company was made liable for water rates on all lands and buildings owned by it in these towns, but otherwise was exempted from taxation.', 'T A Dillon Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-27', 'TAXATION'),
(6431, 'United Steel Companies Ltd v Cullington (Inspector of Taxes)', '', '../links/cases/United Steel Companies Ltd v Cullington.pdf', 'Yes', 'Solicitor of Inland Revenue., Johnson Weatherall Sturt & Hardy', '1939', 'High Court', 'United Steel Companies Ltd v Cullington (Inspector of Taxes) The US & B Mills Ltd had been carrying on a business for a number of years before 1930, and had at no time made any profit. A large sum had accumulated in respect of allowances for wear and tear and trading losses, which had been carried forward from year to year.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-02-10', 'TAXATION'),
(6432, 'Vowles v Armstrong-Siddeley Motors Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Vowles v Armstrong.pdf', 'Yes', 'Hartleys., Berrymans', '1938', 'High Court', 'Vowles v Armstrong-Siddeley Motors Ltd The plaintiff was injured while working on a guillotine machine, which was fitted with a guard in front of the knife. There was a gap of seven-sixteenths of an inch between the bottom of the guard and the bed-plate. Above the lower edge of the knife, there was an unguarded space, through which it was possible for a man to put his fingers.', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-25', 'TORTS'),
(6433, 'Walters v Wright', '', '../links/cases/Walters v Wright.pdf', 'Yes', 'A D Stocks Official Solicitor, Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries', '1938', 'Supreme', 'Walters v Wright By the Agricultural Wages (Regulation) Act 1924, s 16, it is provided that “the expression ‘agriculture’ includes dairy farming, and the use of land as grazing, meadow or pasture land or orchard or osier land or woodland or for market gardens or nursery grounds.â€ The respondents occupied a poultry farm where the grass land was kept solely for the purpose of poultry breeding and poultry rearing. They employed on the poultry farm a general worker, whose wages were below the minimum rate fixed by the Agricultural Wages (Regulation) Act 1924.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-10-24', 'AGRICULTURE'),
(6434, 'Walton v Walton', '', '../links/cases/Walton v Walton.pdf', 'Yes', 'Joynson-Hicks & Co', '1938', 'Supreme', 'Walton v Walton A petition for divorce upon the ground of desertion for a period of 3 years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition disclosed a previous petition for divorce founded on adultery, filed 15 months earlier and subsequently dismissed on the petitioner’s application.', 'J F Compton Miller Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-10', 'FAMILY'),
(6435, 'Watkins v O’Shaughnessy', '', '../links/cases/Watkins v O.pdf', 'Yes', 'Crossman Block & Co., Pattinson & Brewer', '1939', 'High Court', 'Watkins v O’Shaughnessy At a public auction held by the second defendants, the first defendant bought a motor car. He drove it away, although, to the knowledge of the servants of the second defendants, the car was uninsured and unlicensed.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-02-03', 'CRIMINAL LAW '),
(6436, 'Wembley Corporation v Sherren', '', '../links/cases/Wembley Corporation v Sherren.pdf', 'Yes', 'Sharpe Pritchard & Co., Champion & Co', '1938', 'High Court', 'Wembley Corporation v Sherren The defendant was tenant of a property under a seven years’ lease which expired in 1911, and thereafter, by holding over, he became a tenant from year to year. The lease contained a clause giving the lessor the right, in the event of the property being required for (inter alia) a public purpose, to determine the tenancy on giving the tenant one month’s notice.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-10-21', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6437, 'Whittle v Whittle', '', '../links/cases/Whittle v Whittle.pdf', 'Yes', 'Gregory Rowcliffe & Co., Sharpe Pritchard & Co', '1939', 'Supreme', 'Whittle v Whittle Upon the hearing of a summons to revoke a maintenance order upon the ground that the wife had been guilty of adultery, one of the two justices hearing the case found it necessary to retire from the court for the rest of the day.', 'J F Compton Miller Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-13', 'FAMILY'),
(6438, 'Williams v Williams', '', '../links/cases/Williams v Williams.pdf', 'Yes', 'Solly Marshall & Co', '1938', 'Supreme', 'Williams v Williams In September 1934, the respondent left the petitioner in circumstances which clearly constituted desertion. In January 1935, he was sentenced to 3 years’penal servitude. He was released in July 1937, but did not return to the petitioner.', 'M D Chorlton Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-07', 'FAMILY'),
(6439, 'Worthy v Lloyd', '', '../links/cases/Worthy v Lloyd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Fairchild Greig & Co., D A Roberts Thomas', '1939', 'High Court', 'Worthy v Lloyd B was tenant of a controlled house. Before 1932, she had sublet part of it to the respondent, L. On B’s death in 1932, the appellant, being landlord of the whole house, took possession of the part not sublet to L, and that part then became decontrolled.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-02-09', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6440, 'Aldham v United Dairies (London) Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Aldham v United Dairies.pdf', 'Yes', 'W T Iggulden., Blount Petre & Co', '1939', 'High Court', 'Aldham v United Dairies (London) Ltd The plaintiff was attacked and injured by the defendants’ horse, which, attached to a milk-cart, had been left unattended for half-an-hour in a main thoroughfare.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-12-11', 'ANIMALS '),
(6441, 'Alexander v H Burgoine & Sons Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Alexander v H Burgoine.pdf', 'Yes', 'Butt & Bowyer., Hewitt Woollacott & Chown', '1939', 'High Court', 'Alexander v H Burgoine & Sons Ltd In a civil case tried in the King’s Bench Division before a judge and jury, counsel for the defendants, at the close of the plaintiff’s case, addressed the jury and suggested to them that they should stop the case.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-12-01', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6442, 'Alexander v H Burgoine & Sons Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Alexander v H Burgoine.pdf', 'Yes', 'Butt & Bowyer., Hewitt Woollacott & Chown', '1939', 'High Court', 'Alexander v H Burgoine & Sons Ltd In a civil case tried in the King’s Bench Division before a judge and jury, counsel for the defendants, at the close of the plaintiff’s case, addressed the jury and suggested to them that they should stop the case.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-12-01', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6443, 'Angfartygs A/B Halfdan v Price & Pierce Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Angfartygs A.pdf', 'Yes', 'Sinclair Roche & Temperley., Ince Roscoe Wilson & Glover', '1939', 'Appeal', 'Angfartygs A/B Halfdan v Price & Pierce Ltd By a charterparty in the Baltwood form the defendants chartered from the plaintiffs a steamship of the carrying capacity of about 750 standards of timber, which was to be loaded with a full and complete cargo of timber.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-25', 'SHIPPING'),
(6444, 'Angfartygs A/B Halfdan v Price & Pierce Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Angfartygs A.pdf', 'Yes', 'Sinclair Roche & Temperley., Ince Roscoe Wilson & Glover', '1939', 'Appeal', 'Angfartygs A/B Halfdan v Price & Pierce Ltd By a charterparty in the Baltwood form the defendants chartered from the plaintiffs a steamship of the carrying capacity of about 750 standards of timber, which was to be loaded with a full and complete cargo of timber.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-25', 'SHIPPING'),
(6445, 'Appleson v H Littlewood Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Appleson v H Littlewood Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Gibson & Weldon., Torr & Co., Toller Oerton & Balsdon Barnstaple', '1939', 'Appeal', 'Appleson v H Littlewood Ltd The plaintiff brought an action to recover £4,335 alleged to have been due as the result of a football pool. The competition was subject to the usual rule, described as a basic condition, that the transaction should not be attended by, or give rise to, any legal relationship, rights, duties or consequences, or be legally enforceable or the subject of litigation.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-02-13', 'CONTRACT'),
(6446, 'Appleson v H Littlewood Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Appleson v H Littlewood Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Gibson & Weldon., Torr & Co., Toller Oerton & Balsdon Barnstaple', '1939', 'Appeal', 'Appleson v H Littlewood Ltd The plaintiff brought an action to recover £4,335 alleged to have been due as the result of a football pool. The competition was subject to the usual rule, described as a basic condition, that the transaction should not be attended by, or give rise to, any legal relationship, rights, duties or consequences, or be legally enforceable or the subject of litigation.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-02-13', 'CONTRACT'),
(6447, 'Attorney-General v Canter', '', '../links/cases/attorn.pdf', 'Yes', 'Burr Sugden & Co., W G Burr Sugden & Co', '1939', 'High Court', 'Attorney-General v Canter The deceased had incurred liabilities to the Inland Revenue in respect of incorrect statements made in his returns for income tax for the years ending 5 April 1932, and 5 April 1933. No proceedings were taken against him during his lifetime, but proceedings were commenced against his executrix on 26 July 1937.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-12-19', 'TORTS'),
(6448, 'Alexander v H Burgoine & Sons Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Alexander v H Burgoine.pdf', 'Yes', 'Hewitt Woollacott & Chown., Butt & Bowyer', '1939', 'High Court', 'In a civil case tried in the King’s Bench Division before a judge and jury, counsel for the defendants, at the close of the plaintiff’s case, addressed the jury and suggested to them that they should stop the case.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-12-01', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6449, 'Attorney-General v Glyn Mills & Co', '', '../links/cases/Attorney.pdf', 'Yes', 'Bircham & Co., Solicitor of Inland Revenue', '1939', 'High Court', 'Attorney-General v Glyn Mills & Co Under a settlement of 1888, out of property brought into settlement by cousins of the deceased, the deceased was given a life interest subject to forfeiture in the event of alienation, and, subject thereto, the settled property was entailed in tail male in the usual form.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-23', 'SUCCESSION'),
(6450, 'Barrowford Holdings Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners', '', '../links/cases/Barrowford Holdings Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners.pdf', 'Yes', 'Helder Roberts Giles & Co., Layton & Co', '1939', 'High Court', 'Barrowford Holdings Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners The operations of building ships and constructing or repairing works or factories necessarily involve the employment of a large number of contractors, each of whom will be engaged upon the construction or installation of some particular part of the completed whole.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-10-30', 'TORTS'),
(6451, 'Beaumont-Thomas v Blue Star Line Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Beaumont.pdf', 'Yes', 'Elvy Robb & Co., William A Crump & Son', '1939', 'High Court', 'Beaumont-Thomas v Blue Star Line Ltd The plaintiff, while a passenger on the defendant’s steamship, slipped on the floor of the corridor outside his cabin and sustained injuries. He then sued the defendants for damages for breach of an express or implied contract that the floor of the corridor should be safe, and for negligence on the part of their servants in washing the floor in such a way as to make it slippery and dangerous and a concealed trap to the plaintiff without warning him of the danger.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-20', 'CONTRACT'),
(6452, 'Campbell v Campbell', '', '../links/cases/Campbell v Campbell.pdf', 'Yes', 'L A Hart., Kenneth Brown Baker Baker', '1939', 'High Court', 'Campbell v Campbell The husband petitioned for dissolution of the marriage on the ground of adultery, and the wife cross-petitioned. The wife, in her answer, admitted acts of adultery with one of the co-respondents, but alleged, inter alia, that the petitioner had conduced to her adultery by consistently neglecting her and by habitual association with certain named women in spite of her protests.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-12-01', 'FAMILY'),
(6453, 'Canadian Celanese Ltd v BVD Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Canadian Celanese Ltd v BVD Co Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Faithfull Owen & Fraser., Lawrence Jones & Co', '1939', 'High Court', 'Canadian Celanese Ltd v BVD Co Ltd There remains, however, for consideration the fact of the disclaimer, and its effect upon the rights of the parties in the litigation, and on the present appeal. The disclaimer is an unconditional disclaimer. It must necessarily be unconditional.', 'T A Dillon Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-23', 'INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY'),
(6454, 'Cator v Newton and Bates', '', '../links/cases/Cator v Newton and Bates.pdf', 'Yes', 'W G Weller., Jutsum Jones Arthur & Light', '1939', 'High Court', 'Cator v Newton and Bates N was registered on the Land Register as the owner with an absolute title of certain land. There was also on the register an entry that the land was subject to a covenant by N to pay a fair share of the expense of maintaining certain roads.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-11-20', 'LAND '),
(6455, 'Cockwell and Another v Romford Sanitary Steam Laundry Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Cockwell and Another v Romford Sanitary Steam Laundry Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Forbes & Son., Hogan & Hughes', '1939', 'High Court', 'Cockwell and Another v Romford Sanitary Steam Laundry Ltd On 8 March 1929, C, whose executors were the plaintiffs in this action, granted a lease of premises to the defendants, and included in the lease an option for the lessees to purchase the freehold of the premises.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-11-22', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6456, 'Cooper v Luxor (Eastbourne) Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Cooper v Luxor.pdf', 'Yes', 'Mayo Elder & Co., H S Wright & Webb', '1939', 'High Court', 'Cooper v Luxor (Eastbourne) Ltd The defendant companies wished to dispose of certain property, and agreed to pay the plaintiff a commission on the completion of the sale to any purchaser whom he could introduce.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-12-04', 'CONTRACT'),
(6457, 'Dark v Western Motor & Carriage Co (Bristol) Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Dark v Western Motor.pdf', 'Yes', 'Burchells., Wansbroughs Robinson Tayler & Taylor', '1939', 'High Court', 'Dark v Western Motor & Carriage Co (Bristol) Ltd The respondents were charged with using a vehicle upon a public road under a general trade licence for a purpose other than a purpose for which the vehicle was authorised to be used under such licence—namely, the towing of a trailer laden with a motor-boat, contrary to the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 1924 (SR & O 1924, No 1462), reg 29D, and the Roads Act 1920, s 12.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-11', 'CRIMINAL LAW '),
(6458, 'Dover Navigation Co Ltd v Craig', '', '../links/cases/Dover Navigation Co Ltd v Craig.pdf', 'Yes', 'Botterell & Roche., Barnett Janner', '1939', 'High Court', 'Dover Navigation Co Ltd v Craig The deceased had been employed as a sailor on a ship which was sent to a mosquito-infested river in West Africa. It was found that his death was due to yellow fever and/or malaria caused by mosquito bites.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-12-13', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6459, 'Durnell v Scott', '', '../links/cases/Durnell v Scott.pdf', 'Yes', 'Gregory Rowcliffe & Co., C N Johnson, Balham', '1939', 'High Court', 'Durnell v Scott The respondent was charged with having unlawfully driven a motor vehicle on a road at a speed which was dangerous to the pubic having regard to the circumstances, contrary to the Road Traffic Act 1930, s 11(1).', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-17', 'CRIMINAL LAW '),
(6460, 'E Worsley & Co Ltd v Cooper', '', '../links/cases/E Worsley.pdf', 'Yes', 'Windsor & Brown., Woolley, Tyler & Bury', '1939', 'High Court', 'E Worsley & Co Ltd v Cooper The defendants, partners in the defendant firm of Cooper-Kelland Paper Co, prior to August 1937, were in the employment of the plaintiff company, a firm of paper merchants, and from March 1934, onwards they were directors of that company.', 'T A Dillon Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-25', 'TORTS'),
(6461, 'Ellis v Raine', '', '../links/cases/Ellis v Raine.pdf', 'Yes', 'Harris Caine & Co., Doyle Devonshire & Co', '1939', 'High Court', 'Ellis v Raine Upon a trial with a jury of an action for personal injuries, in which the plaintiff claimed both under the Fatal Accidents Acts and under the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1934, the jury awarded £125 damages under the former Act and no damages under the latter. The judge had directed them to award damages under both heads.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-11', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6462, 'English and Scottish Co-Operative Properties Mortgage and Investment Society Ltd v Odhams Press Ltd and Another', '', '../links/cases/English and Scottish Co.pdf', 'Yes', 'Randolph & Dean., Lewis & Lewis', '1939', 'High Court', 'English and Scottish Co-Operative Properties Mortgage and Investment Society Ltd v Odhams Press Ltd and Another The plaintiffs, a society registered under the Industrial and Provident Societies Acts, were charged with making a return of income which was false in the sense that, without any suggestion of moral blame, it was, as a question of law, inaccurate.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-12-06', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6463, 'Fowler v Yorkshire Electric Power Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Fowler v Yorkshire Electric Power Co Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'W H Thompson., William Charles Crocker', '1939', 'High Court', 'Fowler v Yorkshire Electric Power Co Ltd The plaintiff, in the employ of subcontractors to the defendants, was working in their power house. The work was at a considerable height from the ground and the plaintiff was standing upon a ladder and to support himself, rested his hand upon the track of a travelling crane. He was struck by the crane and suffered severe injury to his hand and other injuries.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-20', 'TORTS'),
(6464, 'Fraser-Wallas and Another v Elsie and Doris Waters (a firm)', '', '../links/cases/Fraser.pdf', 'Yes', 'Godfrey A Elkin., Bevan & Co', '1939', 'High Court', 'Fraser-Wallas and Another v Elsie and Doris Waters (a firm) The defendants, who were two sisters in partnership, entered into an agreement with the management of a music-hall to present a variety programme there, and they in turn made an agreement with certain artists whereby the latter accepted an engagement to appear “subject to the conditions of the Arbitrator’s Award, 1919.â€', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-12-29', 'TORTS'),
(6465, 'G Scammell & Nephew Ltd v Rowles', '', '../links/cases/G Scammell.pdf', 'Yes', 'Solicitor of Inland Revenue., Radcliffe Lewis', '1939', 'High Court', 'G Scammell & Nephew Ltd v Rowles B was a director, and in de facto control, of two companies, one of which was largely indebted to the other. T, who was a director of the debtor company, brought an action against both companies and certain of the directors, including B.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-30', 'TAXATION'),
(6466, 'Gibbs-Smith v Gibbs-Smith', '', '../links/cases/Gibbs.pdf', 'Yes', 'Greene & Underhill', '1939', 'Supreme', 'Gibbs-Smith v Gibbs-Smith Upon a petition for divorce on the ground of desertion for a period of 3 years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition, it appeared that the petitioner had filed a petition for divorce within the 3-year period, but that that petition had not been served', 'J F Compton Miller Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-07', 'FAMILY'),
(6467, 'Halifax Building Society v Salisbury', '', '../links/cases/Halifax Building Society v Salisbury.pdf', 'Yes', 'William Sedley & Co., F B Brook', '1939', 'High Court', 'Halifax Building Society v Salisbury The plaintiffs, a building society incorporated under the Building Society Acts, had advanced money on mortgage to the defendant in the usual way for the purchase of a house.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-12-04', 'BANKING AND FINANCE');
INSERT INTO `courtrulings` (`id`, `title`, `content`, `link`, `isshow`, `author`, `date`, `courttype`, `summary`, `presiding`, `casetype`, `subjectmatter`, `caseno`, `counsel1`, `counsel2`, `courtname`, `caseDate`, `subjectmattertitle`) VALUES
(6468, 'Hancock v BSA Tools Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Hancock v BSA Tools Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'T D Jones & Co., Joynson-Hicks & Co', '1939', 'High Court', 'Hancock v BSA Tools Ltd The plaintiff was employed as a driller at 39s per week plus a national bonus of 16s 6d for a 47-hour week. A notice was conspicuously displayed at the works that such engagement was on an hourly basis.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-12-11', 'COMPANY'),
(6469, 'Hibernian Bank Ltd v Gysin & Hanson', '', '../links/cases/Hibernian Bank Ltd v Gysin.pdf', 'Yes', 'Stibbard Gibson & Co ., Kenneth Brown, Baker Baker', '1939', 'High Court', 'Hibernian Bank Ltd v Gysin & Hanson The plaintiff bank was the holder for value of a bill of exchange drawn for £500. The defendants, in the course of their business with the drawers, the Irish Casing Co Ltd accepted the alleged bill, due 3 months after date, and made payable to the order of the company “only.â€ It was also crossed “not negotiable.â€ At the due date the drawers had become indebted to the acceptors in a sum greater than the value of the bill. On presentation, the defendants instructed the bank at which it was payable not to pay, claiming a right to set off the balance due to them.', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-07', 'BANKING AND FINANCE'),
(6470, 'Homolka v Osmond', '', '../links/cases/Homolka v Osmond.pdf', 'Yes', 'Solicitor for the Metropolitan Police., Blyth Dutton Hartley & Blyth', '1939', 'High Court', 'Homolka v Osmond H was convicted for aiding and abetting G, who, being a person disqualified from holding or obtaining a driving licence, while disqualified, unlawfully drove a motor vehicle on a road, contrary to the Road Traffic Act 1930, s 7(4), and the Summary Jurisdiction Act 1848, s 5.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-11', 'CRIMINAL LAW '),
(6471, 'Horlicks Ltd v Garvie', '', '../links/cases/Horlicks Ltd v Garvie.pdf', 'Yes', 'Tucker, Turner & Co., Allen & Son', '1939', 'High Court', 'Horlicks Ltd v Garvie The appellants erected or fixed, or caused to be erected or fixed, at a certain part of a public street an advertisement which was separated into a number of smaller pieces, each less than 12 ft in height, without previously submitting plans and sections to the local authority.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-18', 'CRIMINAL LAW '),
(6472, 'Hunt Brothers (a firm) v Colwell', '', '../links/cases/Hunt Brothers.pdf', 'Yes', 'Wrentmore & Son., Robbins Olivey & Lake', '1939', 'Supreme', 'Hunt Brothers (a firm) v Colwell The defendant, who was the trustee of a deed of arrangement, ordered certain materials to be supplied for the completion of dwelling-houses forming part of the debtor’s estate. The plaintiffs, who supplied these materials, were creditors, and attended the meeting of creditors at which it was agreed to appoint the defendant trustee of the debtor’s estate.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-11-21', 'BANKRUPTCY'),
(6473, 'Infields Ltd v Rosen', '', '../links/cases/Infields Ltd v Rosen.pdf', 'Yes', 'Wm White & Co., H Baron & Co', '1939', 'High Court', 'Infields Ltd v Rosen It was necessary to prove, in a case where there was an acute controversy of fact, whether or not a particular article was manufactured by a firm consisting of two partners. One partner was in England and was available to be called as a witness.', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-12', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6474, 'Jackson v Jackson (otherwise Prudom)', '', '../links/cases/Jackson v Jackson.pdf', 'Yes', 'Reed & Reed., Fielder Le Riche & Co', '1939', 'High Court', 'Jackson v Jackson (otherwise Prudom) Upon a petition for a decree of nullity on the ground that at the time of the marriage the wife was pregnant by some person other than the petitioner, the petitioner at the time of the marriage being ignorant of the fact alleged, it was proposed to ask, in the examination in chief of the petitioner, questions the answers to which would show non-access by the petitioner before marriage', 'J F Compton Miller Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-02-03', 'FAMILY'),
(6475, 'James v Same', '', '../links/cases/James v Same.pdf', 'Yes', 'Smith Rundell Dods & Bockett., Slaughter & May', '1939', 'High Court', 'James v Same My Lords, we have before us three appeals by three workmen, Wooding, James and Hawkins, all of them employed by the Ebbw Vale Steel, Iron and Coal Co Ltd.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-12-13', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6476, 'Jennings and Another v Kelly', '', '../links/cases/Jennings and Another v Kelly.pdf', 'Yes', 'Russell & Arnholz., C Grobel Son & Co', '1939', 'High Court', 'Jennings and Another v Kelly An application for a new licence for the sale of intoxicating liquor for consumption on or off the premises produced a statutory certificate showing an increase of population of not less than 25 per cent in the ward of the city in which the premises were situate.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-11-30', 'LEISURE AND LICENSING'),
(6477, 'Jones v Meatyard', '', '../links/cases/Jones v Meatyard.pdf', 'Yes', 'Solicitor for the Metropolitan Police', '1939', 'Supreme', 'Jones v Meatyard The respondent was charged with having made a false statement for the purpose of obtaining the issue of a certificate of insurance, contrary to the Road Traffic Act 1930, s 112(2). The respondent admitted that, having purchased a small car, he registered it and licensed it in the name of J, who was non-existent, and that, for the purpose of paying a lower rate of insurance, he gave a false address.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-17', 'CRIMINAL LAW '),
(6478, 'Lewis v Denyé', '', '../links/cases/Lewis v Denyé.pdf', 'Yes', 'Field, Roscoe & Co., W Stanley Eastburn', '1979', 'High Court', 'Lewis v Denyé The plaintiff, who was 16½ years of age, met with an accident while employed on a circular wood-cutting machine in the defendant’s factory, where he had been so employed, on and off, for some 17 months.', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1979-01-27', 'TORTS'),
(6479, 'London County Council v Lees', '', '../links/cases/London County Council v Lees.pdf', 'Yes', 'J R Howard Roberts., Samuel Tonkin Booth & Co', '1939', 'High Court', 'London County Council v Lees L, a shopkeeper who also kept a restaurant, was charged with having at 2 pm on a Sunday, unlawfully sold chocolate eclairs, cream buns, jam tarts, fruit cake, swiss roll and veal-and-ham pies, contrary to the Shops (Sunday Trading Restriction) Act 1936 s 1, Sched II, prohibiting the sale after 10 am of articles including bread, flour confectionery, groceries and fish.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-19', 'SALE OF GOODS'),
(6480, 'Marginson v Blackburn Borough Council', '', '../links/cases/Marginson v Blackburn Borough Council.pdf', 'Yes', 'Robinson & Bradley., Gibson & Weldon', '1939', 'High Court', 'Marginson v Blackburn Borough Council The plaintiff sued the defendants for damages in respect of injuries received by his daughter and himself, and in respect of the death of his wife, arising out of a collision between a car driven by the plaintiff’s wife and a motor omnibus driven by the defendants’ servant.', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-27', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6481, 'Marshall v Matthews', '', '../links/cases/Marshall v Matthews.pdf', 'Yes', 'Sharpe Pritchard & Co., Reynolds Miles Barnes & Drake', '1939', 'High Court', 'Marshall v Matthews The respondent was charged with unlawfully having in his possession for sale, or delivery under a contract of sale, by retail 64 loaves of bread which were not of the net weight of 1lb or an integral number of pounds contrary to the Sale of Food (Weights and Measures) Act 1926, s 6(2).', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-13', 'SALE OF GOODS'),
(6482, 'R v Clifford', '', '../links/cases/R v Clifford.pdf', 'Yes', 'Registrar of the Court of Criminal Appeal', '1939', 'Supreme', 'R v Clifford It was decided in R v Scoffin that the material date in deciding whether or not a prisoner can be sent for Borstal treatment is the date on which he is sentenced.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-30', 'PRISONS'),
(6483, 'R v Jones', '', '../links/cases/R v Jones.pdf', 'Yes', 'Legal Department Metropolitan Police', '1939', 'Supreme', 'R v Jones In addition to a charge of a substantive crime, the appellant was also charged with being an habitual criminal. On the hearing of this further charge, it was established that, since his release from prison some months previously, the appellant had made numerous efforts to obtain work.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-16', 'CRIMINAL LAW '),
(6484, 'R v Salisbury', '', '../links/cases/R v Salisbury.pdf', 'Yes', 'Ellis & Fairbairn., Gibson & Weldon', '1939', 'High Court', 'R v Salisbury The appellant was convicted of having permitted premises to be used for unlawful gaming and for purposes in connection with a lottery.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-16', 'LEISURE AND LICENSING'),
(6485, 'R v Treanor (or McAvoy)', '', '../links/cases/R v Treanor.pdf', 'Yes', 'Registrar of the Court of Criminal Appeal., Director of Public Prosecutions', '1939', 'High Court', 'R v Treanor (or McAvoy) In July 1916, the appellant lawfully married a woman, whom he deserted in 1918. The prosecution was not in a position to prove that since that time he knew that that woman was alive. In July 1930, he went through a form of marriage with L A, and that so-called marriage was the first of the bigamies charged against the appellant.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-12-16', 'CRIMINAL LAW '),
(6486, 'R v Weston-super-Mare Licensing Justices, Ex parte Powell', '', '../links/cases/R v Weston.pdf', 'Yes', 'Godden Holme & Ward., Solicitor of Customs and Excise., Cameron Kemm & Co', '1939', 'Appeal', 'R v Weston-super-Mare Licensing Justices, Ex parte Powell A licensee of licensed premises made an application to the local justices for approval of certain alterations to the premises, involving the inclusion of certain adjoining premises, which had hitherto been entirely separate from the licensed premises, and an enlargement of the existing saloon bar.', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-20', 'LEISURE AND LICENSING'),
(6487, 'Re A Special Reference in the Matter of the Union of the Benefices of Westoe and South Shields, St Hilda', '', '../links/cases/Re A Special Reference in the Matter of the Union of the Benefices of Westoe and South Shields.pdf', 'Yes', 'Evill & Coleman., Milles, Jennings White & Foster', '1939', 'High Court', 'Re A Special Reference in the Matter of the Union of the Benefices of Westoe and South Shields, St Hilda Under a scheme put forward by the ecclesiastical commissioners, two benefices in the county and diocese of Durham were to be united in order to remove the church and endowments of one of the benefices to one of the new housing districts in another part of the diocese', 'T A Dillon Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-17', 'ECCLESIASTICAL'),
(6488, 'Re An Arbitration between T D Bailey, Son & Co and Ross T Smyth & Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Re An Arbitration between T D Bailey.pdf', 'Yes', 'Thomas Cooper & Co., Middleton Lewis & Clarke', '1938', 'High Court', 'Re An Arbitration between T D Bailey, Son & Co and Ross T Smyth & Co Ltd A contract dated 3 August 1938, provided for the purchase of 15,000 units, 2 per cent more or less of No 2 yellow American corn, with an option to the seller of shipping a further 3 per cent more or less on contract quantity.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-12-14', 'SALE OF GOODS'),
(6489, 'Re Farmer, Nightingale v Whybrow', '', '../links/cases/Re Farmer.pdf', 'Yes', 'Frank Taylor & Nightingale., Rye & Eyre', '1938', 'High Court', 'Re Farmer, Nightingale v Whybrow A testatrix gave an annuity of £300 and directed that a sum should be set apart to provide by its income for the annuity.', 'F Honig Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-11-17', 'SUCCESSION'),
(6490, 'Re Hodson’s Settlement, Brookes v Attorney-General', '', '../links/cases/Re Hodson.pdf', 'Yes', 'Solicitor of Inland Revenue., Cannon Brookes & Odgers', '1939', 'High Court', 'Re Hodson’s Settlement, Brookes v Attorney-General A settlor vested a trust fund in trustees upon trust that they should, if the income were sufficient, pay the clear yearly sum of £1,200 to S during her life. During the joint lives of the settlor and S, the residue of the income was to be accumulated and form an accumulations fund.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-20', 'TRUSTS'),
(6491, 'Re Kay’s Settlement, Broadbent v MacNab', '', '../links/cases/Re Kay.pdf', 'Yes', 'Skelton & Co, Manchester', '1938', 'Supreme', 'Re Kay’s Settlement, Broadbent v MacNab By a voluntary settlement made in 1907 the settlor as settlor assigned to trustees, inter alia, all that share to which she was, or might become, entitled in a sum of £20,000 under the trusts of a deed of 1875. The settlement also contained a covenant to settle after-acquired property. The share in the sum of £20,000 was subject to a power of appointment vested in the settlor’s mother, which the latter subsequently exercised, appointing a share in that sum to the settlor.', 'F Honig Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-12-13', 'TRUSTS'),
(6492, 'Sharpe v Tophams Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Sharpe v Tophams Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Kenneth Brown Baker Baker., B Trayton Kenward', '1939', 'High Court', 'Sharpe v Tophams Ltd The trustees of a will held 230 shares in a company, and from time to time they had requested that the share certificates should be altered to different amounts, each amount represented by a separate certificate.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-11', 'TRUSTS'),
(6493, 'Sifton v Sifton', '', '../links/cases/Sifton v Sifton.pdf', 'Yes', 'Church Adams Tatham & Co., Turner & Co', '1938', 'High Court', 'Sifton v Sifton The husband petitioner in a petition for divorce relied solely upon desertion for a period of 3 years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition. He asked that the discretion of the court should be exercised in his favour, and put in a discretion statement admitting adultery in 1934. The respondent obtained leave to file an answer including an allegation of adultery based upon the petitioner’s admission.', 'J F Compton Miller Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-12-16', 'FAMILY'),
(6494, 'Sloan v Hanson', '', '../links/cases/Sloan v Hanson.pdf', 'Yes', 'William Hurd & Son., Kenneth Brown, Baker, Baker', '1939', 'High Court', 'Sloan v Hanson The plaintiff was a widow, and claimed damages under the Fatal Accidents Act in respect of the death of her husband, who had been killed in a motor car accident in which the defendant’s car had been involved.', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-13', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6495, 'Square v Model Farm Dairies (Bournemouth) Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Square v Model Farm Dairies.pdf', 'Yes', 'Peacock & Goddard., Clarke, Square & Co', '1939', 'High Court', 'Square v Model Farm Dairies (Bournemouth) Ltd The plaintiff S arranged with the defendants, who were large distributors of milk, to supply him, his family and household with milk.', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-25', 'SALE OF GOODS'),
(6496, 'Swettenham v Swettenham', '', '../links/cases/Swettenham v Swettenham.pdf', 'Yes', 'Gordon Dadds & Co., Lowe & Co', '1938', 'High Court', 'Swettenham v Swettenham The registrar’s report as to the maintenance of a lunatic wife recommended that the husband should covenant to pay an annuity of stated amount during the joint lives of himself and the wife, and should secure a named sum for her benefit during her life, and that £1,500, being accumulations of the wife’s capital in the hands of her receiver, should be expended in the purchase of an annuity for her benefit.', 'J F Compton Miller Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-12-21', 'FAMILY'),
(6497, 'Ullstrom v Naar', '', '../links/cases/Ullstrom v Naar.pdf', 'Yes', 'Samuel Price & Sons., H Bueno de Mesquita.,Teff & Teff', '1938', 'Appeal', 'Ullstrom v Naar The claim of the plaintiff was based upon an allegation of conspiracy to defraud the defendants by selling to them worthless shares. During the opening speech of counsel, the judge, forming the opinion that investigation of accounts was involved, referred the case to an official referee for trial.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1938-12-05', 'PRACTICE DIRECTIONS'),
(6498, 'Ward v Barclay Perkins & Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Ward v Barclay Perkins.pdf', 'Yes', 'Owen White & Catlin., Lewis & Lewis', '1939', 'High Court', 'Ward v Barclay Perkins & Co Ltd The plaintiff was employed by the defendant company, who had established a staff endowment and pension scheme, to which the plaintiff had contributed for several years on the footing that he was a staff employee.', 'Maurice Share Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-23', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6499, 'Westripp v Baldock', '', '../links/cases/Westripp v Baldock.pdf', 'Yes', 'H Flint & Co., Ince, Roscoe, Wilson & Glover', '1939', 'High Court', 'Westripp v Baldock The plaintiff and the defendant occupied adjoining houses included within a building scheme, and the restrictions were enforceable by either of them against the other. The material restriction was that on no lot should any building be erected as a shop, warehouse or factory, or any trade or manufacture be carried on or any operative machinery be fixed or placed.', 'E Fuller Briscoe Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1939-01-26', 'LAND '),
(6500, 'B Sunley & Co Ltd v Cunard White Star Ltd', '', '../links/cases/B vs Cunard.pdf', 'Yes', 'Hill Dickinson & Co., Munton Morris King & Co', '1940', 'Appeal', 'B Sunley & Co Ltd v Cunard White Star The plaintiff company secured a contract in November 1937, to level the site of a new aerodrome in Guernsey. For the performing of such work it was necessary to remove a tractor and a scraper from a site at Doncaster to the site in Guernsey.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-03-11', 'QUANTUM'),
(6501, 'B Sunley & Co Ltd v Cunard White Star Ltd', '', '../links/cases/B vs Cunard.pdf', 'Yes', 'Hill Dickinson & Co., Munton Morris King & Co', '1940', 'Appeal', 'B Sunley & Co Ltd v Cunard White Star The plaintiff company secured a contract in November 1937, to level the site of a new aerodrome in Guernsey. For the performing of such work it was necessary to remove a tractor and a scraper from a site at Doncaster to the site in Guernsey.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-03-11', 'QUANTUM'),
(6502, 'Bayliss v Chatters', '', '../links/cases/Bayliss vs Chatters.pdf', 'Yes', 'Wilberforce Allen & Bryant., F S Collinge & Co.,', '1940', 'Supreme', 'Bayliss v Chatters The appellant owned 4 bungalows, which were let furnished from time to time from early in 1937 till 30 September 1938. From that date, however, they were at all times uninhabited. The furniture was removed and the water was turned off.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-17', 'LOCAL GOVERNMENT'),
(6503, 'Bayliss v Chatters', '', '../links/cases/Bayliss vs Chatters.pdf', 'Yes', 'Wilberforce Allen & Bryant., F S Collinge & Co.,', '1940', 'Supreme', 'Bayliss v Chatters The appellant owned 4 bungalows, which were let furnished from time to time from early in 1937 till 30 September 1938. From that date, however, they were at all times uninhabited. The furniture was removed and the water was turned off.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-17', 'LOCAL GOVERNMENT'),
(6504, 'Blanket v Palmer', '', '../links/cases/Blanket vs Palmer.pdf', 'Yes', 'H W Henniker Rance & Co., Crane & Hawkins', '1940', 'High Court', 'Blanket v Palmer The appellant was the landlord of a shop in which the respondent carried on business. The premises were let to the respondent at a rent of £150 per annum, payable weekly at the rate of £2 17s 8d.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-16', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6505, 'Blanket v Palmer', '', '../links/cases/Blanket vs Palmer.pdf', 'Yes', 'H W Henniker Rance & Co., Crane & Hawkins', '1940', 'High Court', 'Blanket v Palmer The appellant was the landlord of a shop in which the respondent carried on business. The premises were let to the respondent at a rent of £150 per annum, payable weekly at the rate of £2 17s 8d.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-16', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6506, 'Boarland v Pirie Appleton & Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Boardland vs Pierie.pdf', 'Yes', 'Richards Butler & Co., Piesse & Sons', '1940', 'High Court', 'Boarland v Pirie Appleton & Co Ltd Two companies, S Ltd and P A & Co Ltd, who were lessees of certain premises used by them as factories for the purposes of their respective businesses, had entered into strict covenants to repair and maintain the respective premises and to deliver them up in good condition on the determination of the leases.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-23', 'TAXATION'),
(6507, 'Bond v Norman', '', '../links/cases/Bond vs Norman.pdf', 'Yes', 'Sharpe Pritchard & Co., Harrison & Sons., Maxwell Bailey & CoSimpson Curtis & Burrill.,', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Bond v Norman The appellant corporation intimated to the respondent that they intended to demolish certain property included in a clearance scheme, owing to the failure of the owner to demolish the same. The respondent, the legal owner of an adjoining house, was entitled to a right of support for that house from the property ordered to be demolished.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-03-06', 'LAND '),
(6508, 'Bond v Norman', '', '../links/cases/Bond vs Norman.pdf', 'Yes', 'Sharpe Pritchard & Co., Harrison & Sons., Maxwell Bailey & CoSimpson Curtis & Burrill.,', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Bond v Norman The appellant corporation intimated to the respondent that they intended to demolish certain property included in a clearance scheme, owing to the failure of the owner to demolish the same. The respondent, the legal owner of an adjoining house, was entitled to a right of support for that house from the property ordered to be demolished.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-03-06', 'LAND '),
(6509, 'Braken Borough vs Spalding', '', '../links/cases/brakenborough vs spalding.pdf', 'Yes', 'Stibbard Gibson & Co., Crane & Hawkins., Kenneth Brown Baker Baker', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Braken Borough vs Spalding The S Market, which was owned by the appellant council, was an approved certification centre for the purposes of the Cattle Subsidy Scheme 1937. That scheme required, inter alia, that the place where animals were to be examined should be equipped with adequate penning accommodation for cattle. P, a local farmer, sent a number of steers in charge of employees to the market to be graded.', 'F Honig Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-25', 'LOCAL GOVERNMENT'),
(6510, 'Braken Borough vs Spalding', '', '../links/cases/brakenborough vs spalding.pdf', 'Yes', 'Stibbard Gibson & Co., Crane & Hawkins., Kenneth Brown Baker Baker', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Braken Borough vs Spalding The S Market, which was owned by the appellant council, was an approved certification centre for the purposes of the Cattle Subsidy Scheme 1937. That scheme required, inter alia, that the place where animals were to be examined should be equipped with adequate penning accommodation for cattle. P, a local farmer, sent a number of steers in charge of employees to the market to be graded.', 'F Honig Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-25', 'LOCAL GOVERNMENT'),
(6511, 'British Industrial Plastics Ltd, and Others v Ferguson and Others', '', '../links/cases/British vs Ferguson and others.pdf', 'Yes', 'Crane & Hawkins., Chas G Bradshaw & Waterson', '1940', 'High Court', 'British Industrial Plastics Ltd, and Others v Ferguson and Others The defendant D had been employed by the plaintiffs for many years. In 1932, he left their employ, and thereafter entered into a leaving agreement with them whereby he undertook, inter alia, until 31 March 1934, not to interest himself directly or indirectly in the manufacture or sale of certain chemicals which were used in a secret process of the plaintiffs.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-08', 'CONTRACT'),
(6512, 'British Industrial Plastics Ltd, and Others v Ferguson and Others', '', '../links/cases/British vs Ferguson and others.pdf', 'Yes', 'Crane & Hawkins., Chas G Bradshaw & Waterson', '1940', 'High Court', 'British Industrial Plastics Ltd, and Others v Ferguson and Others The defendant D had been employed by the plaintiffs for many years. In 1932, he left their employ, and thereafter entered into a leaving agreement with them whereby he undertook, inter alia, until 31 March 1934, not to interest himself directly or indirectly in the manufacture or sale of certain chemicals which were used in a secret process of the plaintiffs.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-08', 'CONTRACT'),
(6513, 'Broome and Another v Pardess Co-Operative Society of Orange Growers', '', '../links/cases/Broom vs Pardss.pdf', 'Yes', 'Herbert Oppenheimer Nathan & Vandyk', '1940', 'High Court', 'Broome and Another v Pardess Co-Operative Society of Orange Growers surplus on sale above 7s 6d per case to be remitted to the defendants, subject to the right of the plaintiffs to retain their commission and expenses. During the growing season covered by the contract the weather had been abnormally wet, with the result that the oranges, though apparently shipped in good condition, were, on arrival in London, to a large extent unsaleable, and such as were saleable required repacking.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-22', 'CONTRACT'),
(6514, 'Broome and Another v Pardess Co-Operative Society of Orange Growers', '', '../links/cases/Broom vs Pardss.pdf', 'Yes', 'Herbert Oppenheimer Nathan & Vandyk', '1940', 'High Court', 'Broome and Another v Pardess Co-Operative Society of Orange Growers surplus on sale above 7s 6d per case to be remitted to the defendants, subject to the right of the plaintiffs to retain their commission and expenses. During the growing season covered by the contract the weather had been abnormally wet, with the result that the oranges, though apparently shipped in good condition, were, on arrival in London, to a large extent unsaleable, and such as were saleable required repacking.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-22', 'CONTRACT'),
(6515, 'Brown v Sherwood Colliery Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Brown vs Sherwood.pdf', 'Yes', 'Barlow Lyde & Gilbert., Morris & Foster.,Taylor Jelf & Co,Hopkin & Son', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Brown v Sherwood Colliery Co Ltd A workman suffered from pain, which he attributed to an old injury incurred in his employment with his employers, the appellants. He therefore asked the employers to agree to a reference to a medical referee, but they refused, whereupon he obtained a report from his own doctor, and then applied to the registrar, who made an order for reference.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-28', 'INDUSTRY'),
(6516, 'Brown v Sherwood Colliery Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Brown vs Sherwood.pdf', 'Yes', 'Barlow Lyde & Gilbert., Morris & Foster.,Taylor Jelf & Co,Hopkin & Son', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Brown v Sherwood Colliery Co Ltd A workman suffered from pain, which he attributed to an old injury incurred in his employment with his employers, the appellants. He therefore asked the employers to agree to a reference to a medical referee, but they refused, whereupon he obtained a report from his own doctor, and then applied to the registrar, who made an order for reference.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-28', 'INDUSTRY'),
(6517, 'Camden Nominees Ltd v Slack and Others', '', '../links/cases/Camden vs Slack.pdf', 'Yes', 'Phoenix Levinson Walters & Shane., S Seifert & Co', '1940', 'High Court', 'Camden Nominees Ltd v Slack and Others The plaintiffs were owners of a block of flats let upon tenancy agreements in a standard form, which included the obligation of the tenant to pay the rent and the obligation of the landlord to light and clean the common staircase and maintain constant hot water and central heating. It was assumed that the landlord’s obligations had not been fulfilled.', 'Charles Newton Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-27', 'TORTS'),
(6518, 'Camden Nominees Ltd v Slack and Others', '', '../links/cases/Camden vs Slack.pdf', 'Yes', 'Phoenix Levinson Walters & Shane., S Seifert & Co', '1940', 'High Court', 'Camden Nominees Ltd v Slack and Others The plaintiffs were owners of a block of flats let upon tenancy agreements in a standard form, which included the obligation of the tenant to pay the rent and the obligation of the landlord to light and clean the common staircase and maintain constant hot water and central heating. It was assumed that the landlord’s obligations had not been fulfilled.', 'Charles Newton Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-27', 'TORTS'),
(6519, 'Cameron v Prendergast', '', '../links/cases/Cameron vs Pendergast.pdf', 'Yes', 'Edell & Co', '1940', 'High Court', 'Cameron v Prendergast Towards the end of 1934, C, who had for many years been a director of a company, notified his fellow-directors of his intention to resign, as he was entitled to do under the articles. The other directors thereupon wrote asking him not to serve notice of resignation, saying that, in consideration of his not doing so, the company would pay him a sum of £45,000, and would enter into a formal deed to that effect.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-03-12', 'TAXATION'),
(6520, 'Cameron v Prendergast', '', '../links/cases/Cameron vs Pendergast.pdf', 'Yes', 'Edell & Co', '1940', 'High Court', 'Cameron v Prendergast Towards the end of 1934, C, who had for many years been a director of a company, notified his fellow-directors of his intention to resign, as he was entitled to do under the articles. The other directors thereupon wrote asking him not to serve notice of resignation, saying that, in consideration of his not doing so, the company would pay him a sum of £45,000, and would enter into a formal deed to that effect.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-03-12', 'TAXATION'),
(6521, 'Chapelton v Barry Urban District Council', '', '../links/cases/Chapelton vs Barry.pdf', 'Yes', 'Kingsley Wood Williams & Murphy., Edward T Davies & Son.,Wrentmore & Son', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Chapelton v Barry Urban District Council The respondent council provided deck chairs for persons desiring to use them on the beach. The vacant chairs were stacked up on the beach, and beside them was a notice reading as follows: “Barry Urban District Council. Cold Knap. Hire of chairs. 2d. per session of 3 hours.â€', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-30', 'TORTS'),
(6522, 'Commissioners of Church Temporalities in Wales v Representative Body of the Church in Wales and Tithe Redemption Commission', '', '../links/cases/Commisioner.pdf', 'Yes', 'Milles Jennings White & Foster', '1940', 'High Court', 'Commissioners of Church Temporalities in Wales v Representative Body of the Church in Wales and Tithe Redemption Commission The plaintiffs were the Commissioners of Church Temporalities in Wales as constituted by the Welsh Church Act 1914, s 10, and, as such, were a lay corporation. The first defendants, the Representative Body of the Church in Wales, were a body incorporated by Royal Charter, pursuant to the Welsh Church Act 1914, s 13.', 'F Honig Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-07', 'ECCLESIASTICAL'),
(6523, 'Commissioners of Church Temporalities in Wales v Representative Body of the Church in Wales and Tithe Redemption Commission', '', '../links/cases/Commisioner.pdf', 'Yes', 'Milles Jennings White & Foster', '1940', 'High Court', 'Commissioners of Church Temporalities in Wales v Representative Body of the Church in Wales and Tithe Redemption Commission The plaintiffs were the Commissioners of Church Temporalities in Wales as constituted by the Welsh Church Act 1914, s 10, and, as such, were a lay corporation. The first defendants, the Representative Body of the Church in Wales, were a body incorporated by Royal Charter, pursuant to the Welsh Church Act 1914, s 13.', 'F Honig Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-07', 'ECCLESIASTICAL'),
(6524, 'Davidson v Barclays Bank Ltd', '', '../links/cases/davidson vs barclays bank ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Kingsbury & Turner., Durrant Cooper & Hambling', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Davidson v Barclays Bank Ltd On 17 December 1938, the plaintiff, a credit bookmaker, issued a cheque for £2 15s 8d which, when presented to the defendant bank, was dishonoured by them, being marked with the words “Not sufficient.â€', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-25', 'BANKING AND FINANCE'),
(6525, 'Davidson v Barclays Bank Ltd', '', '../links/cases/davidson vs barclays bank ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Kingsbury & Turner., Durrant Cooper & Hambling', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Davidson v Barclays Bank Ltd On 17 December 1938, the plaintiff, a credit bookmaker, issued a cheque for £2 15s 8d which, when presented to the defendant bank, was dishonoured by them, being marked with the words “Not sufficient.â€', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-25', 'BANKING AND FINANCE'),
(6526, 'Digby v General Accident, Fire and Life Assurance Corporation Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Digby vs General Accident.pdf', 'Yes', 'Kenneth Brown Baker Baker., Walter Burgis & Co', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Digby v General Accident, Fire and Life Assurance Corporation Ltd The claimant was the chauffeur employed by the owner of a car. In a collision, the owner was injured, and, in proceedings in respect of that accident, she recovered damages against the chauffeur. The chauffeur thereupon claimed that he was entitled to be indemnified against the sum awarded as damages by the respondent insurance company under a policy issued by them to the owner.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-13', 'INSURANCE'),
(6527, 'Digby v General Accident, Fire and Life Assurance Corporation Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Digby vs General Accident.pdf', 'Yes', 'Kenneth Brown Baker Baker., Walter Burgis & Co', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Digby v General Accident, Fire and Life Assurance Corporation Ltd The claimant was the chauffeur employed by the owner of a car. In a collision, the owner was injured, and, in proceedings in respect of that accident, she recovered damages against the chauffeur. The chauffeur thereupon claimed that he was entitled to be indemnified against the sum awarded as damages by the respondent insurance company under a policy issued by them to the owner.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-13', 'INSURANCE'),
(6528, 'Dormer and Others v Newcastle-upon-Tyne Corporation', '', '../links/cases/Dormer vs Newcastle.pdf', 'Yes', 'Collyer-Bristow & Co.,Dawson & Co', '1940', 'High Court', 'Dormer and Others v Newcastle-upon-Tyne Corporation The defendant corporation had erected a barrier, consisting of posts and rails, along the edge of the pavement in front of a block of shops and offices owned by the plaintiffs, with the object of providing that persons walking on the pavement should, when wishing to cross the street, use the pedestrian crossing at either end of the barrier.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-04-30', 'LOCAL GOVERNMENT'),
(6529, 'Dormer and Others v Newcastle-upon-Tyne Corporation', '', '../links/cases/Dormer vs Newcastle.pdf', 'Yes', 'Collyer-Bristow & Co.,Dawson & Co', '1940', 'High Court', 'Dormer and Others v Newcastle-upon-Tyne Corporation The defendant corporation had erected a barrier, consisting of posts and rails, along the edge of the pavement in front of a block of shops and offices owned by the plaintiffs, with the object of providing that persons walking on the pavement should, when wishing to cross the street, use the pedestrian crossing at either end of the barrier.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-04-30', 'LOCAL GOVERNMENT'),
(6530, 'Ettenfield v Ettenfield', '', '../links/cases/ethernfield vs ethernfield.pdf', 'Yes', 'Boxall & Boxall., Woosnam & Co., Rowcliffe & Co,J Ogden Hardicker Hanson & Co', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Ettenfield v Ettenfield The respondent having left his wife in August 1935, a separation agreement was arrived at between them in September 1935. The terms of this agreement were set out in correspondence between solicitors acting for the two parties, and were consistently observed by both parties.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-23', 'FAMILY'),
(6531, 'Ettenfield v Ettenfield', '', '../links/cases/ethernfield vs ethernfield.pdf', 'Yes', 'Boxall & Boxall., Woosnam & Co., Rowcliffe & Co,J Ogden Hardicker Hanson & Co', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Ettenfield v Ettenfield The respondent having left his wife in August 1935, a separation agreement was arrived at between them in September 1935. The terms of this agreement were set out in correspondence between solicitors acting for the two parties, and were consistently observed by both parties.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-23', 'FAMILY'),
(6532, 'Fife Coal Co Ltd v Young', '', '../links/cases/Fife coal vs Young.pdf', 'Yes', 'Beveridge & Co., Wallace Begg & Co., Macbeth Currie & Co', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Fife Coal Co Ltd v Young For about a month prior to 27 April 1938, the respondent’s work was that of a packer employed in building pillars to support the roof of part of the appellants’ underground workings, and his work necessitated continuous kneeling.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-03-14', 'INDUSTRY'),
(6533, 'Friis v Paramount Bagwash Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Friis vs Paramount.pdf', 'Yes', 'Morris & Son., Wedlake Letts & Birds', '1940', 'High Court', 'Friis v Paramount Bagwash Co Ltd In a remitted action by an accountant for the balance of an account for professional services and sums paid on behalf of the defendant company, the county court judge on 11 October 1939, on the application of the plaintiff, granted an adjournment, on condition that £10 on account of costs thrown away should be paid into court within 14 days, and, if the plaintiff failed to pay those costs, the action should stand dismissed with costs. The plaintiff did not pay those costs.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-12', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6534, 'Friis v Paramount Bagwash Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Friis vs Paramount.pdf', 'Yes', 'Morris & Son., Wedlake Letts & Birds', '1940', 'High Court', 'Friis v Paramount Bagwash Co Ltd In a remitted action by an accountant for the balance of an account for professional services and sums paid on behalf of the defendant company, the county court judge on 11 October 1939, on the application of the plaintiff, granted an adjournment, on condition that £10 on account of costs thrown away should be paid into court within 14 days, and, if the plaintiff failed to pay those costs, the action should stand dismissed with costs. The plaintiff did not pay those costs.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-12', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6535, 'Geiringer v Swiss Bank Corporation', '', '../links/cases/Geiringer vs Swiss.pdf', 'Yes', 'Donald W Plunkett., Herbert Oppenheimer Nathan & Vandyk', '1940', 'High Court', 'Geiringer v Swiss Bank Corporation In April 1939, the plaintiff brought an action against a London bank, claiming to be entitled to certain securities in the hands of the bank. The bank interpleaded, alleging that they held the securities for the account of a Viennese bank and that they themselves claimed no interest therein.', 'F Honig Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-24', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6536, 'Goodbarne v Buck and Another', '', '../links/cases/Goodbarne vs buck and another.pdf', 'Yes', 'Evill & Coleman', '1940', 'High Court', 'Goodbarne v Buck and Another The defendant WEB, with the knowledge of the defendant HAB, signed a proposal form for a policy to satisfy the Road Traffic Act 1930, in the name of the defendant HAB as proposer and registered owner of the van, the vehicle to be driven by WEB.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-23', 'INSURANCE'),
(6537, 'Goodbarne v Buck and Another', '', '../links/cases/Goodbarne vs buck and another.pdf', 'Yes', 'Evill & Coleman', '1940', 'High Court', 'Goodbarne v Buck and Another The defendant WEB, with the knowledge of the defendant HAB, signed a proposal form for a policy to satisfy the Road Traffic Act 1930, in the name of the defendant HAB as proposer and registered owner of the van, the vehicle to be driven by WEB.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-23', 'INSURANCE'),
(6538, 'Goodchild v Romford Borough Council', '', '../links/cases/Goodchild vs Romford.pdf', 'Yes', 'Hunt & Hunt', '1940', 'High Court', 'Goodchild v Romford Borough Council The plaintiff was a freeholder of land which he had developed as an arcade. It consisted of a number of shops, and included a covered footway, which, however, had never been dedicated to the public as a highway.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-03-19', 'LAND '),
(6539, 'Hollis v Wingfield and Others', '', '../links/cases/Hollis vs Wingfield.pdf', 'Yes', 'Evill & Coleman., Fladgate & Co', '1940', 'High Court', 'Hollis v Wingfield and Others A mortgagor mortgaged certain shares in a company to a first mortgagee for £7,000 and interest, which was later reduced to approximately £5,000. The company went into liquidation, and the liquidator paid to the first mortgagee from the proceeds of sale of the company’s property an amount of some £9,000, and the first mortgagee became to that extent a mortgagee in possession.', 'F Honig Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-31', 'LAND '),
(6540, 'Hotel Regina (Torquay) Ltd v Moon', '', '../links/cases/hotel vs moon.pdf', 'Yes', 'Walter Crimp & Co., Kitsons Hutchings Easterbrook & Co', '1940', 'High Court', 'Hotel Regina (Torquay) Ltd v Moon The appellants, who were respectively the proprietors and the managers of an unlicensed hotel, were charged and convicted, together with two employees, the head waiter and the boots, of selling beer by retail without licence, contrary to the Finance (1909–10) Act 1910, s 50(3). The employees, who pleaded guilty to the charge, obtained liquor from a neighbouring licensed house, stored it in a cupboard in the hotel, and sold it to guests when it was ordered.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-04-18', 'LEISURE AND LICENSING'),
(6541, 'Hotel Regina (Torquay) Ltd v Moon', '', '../links/cases/hotel vs moon.pdf', 'Yes', 'Walter Crimp & Co., Kitsons Hutchings Easterbrook & Co', '1940', 'High Court', 'Hotel Regina (Torquay) Ltd v Moon The appellants, who were respectively the proprietors and the managers of an unlicensed hotel, were charged and convicted, together with two employees, the head waiter and the boots, of selling beer by retail without licence, contrary to the Finance (1909–10) Act 1910, s 50(3). The employees, who pleaded guilty to the charge, obtained liquor from a neighbouring licensed house, stored it in a cupboard in the hotel, and sold it to guests when it was ordered.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-04-18', 'LEISURE AND LICENSING'),
(6542, 'Imperial Smelting Corporation Ltd v Joseph Constantine Steamship Line Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Imperial vs Joseph.pdf', 'Yes', 'Holman Fenwick & Willan., Parker Garrett & Co', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Imperial Smelting Corporation Ltd v Joseph Constantine Steamship Line Ltd A ship was chartered to load a cargo, but on the day before she should have proceeded to her berth an explosion occurred in the auxiliary boiler, which made it impossible for her to undertake the voyage.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-03-01', 'CONTRACT'),
(6543, 'Imperial Smelting Corporation Ltd v Joseph Constantine Steamship Line Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Imperial vs Joseph.pdf', 'Yes', 'Holman Fenwick & Willan., Parker Garrett & Co', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Imperial Smelting Corporation Ltd v Joseph Constantine Steamship Line Ltd A ship was chartered to load a cargo, but on the day before she should have proceeded to her berth an explosion occurred in the auxiliary boiler, which made it impossible for her to undertake the voyage.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-03-01', 'CONTRACT'),
(6544, 'Inland Revenue Commissioners v Wolverton', '', '../links/cases/inland vs wolvert.pdf', 'Yes', 'Waterhouse & Co', '1940', 'High Court', 'Inland Revenue Commissioners v Wolverton The respondent was the widow and residuary legatee of W, who died on 3 October 1932. Prior to his death, they had lived together on a partly leasehold and partly freehold property owned by him, and after his death the respondent continued to live there, employed and paid the servants, and kept up the grounds.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-31', 'TAXATION'),
(6545, 'Inland Revenue Commissioners v Wolverton', '', '../links/cases/inland vs wolvert.pdf', 'Yes', 'Waterhouse & Co', '1940', 'High Court', 'Inland Revenue Commissioners v Wolverton The respondent was the widow and residuary legatee of W, who died on 3 October 1932. Prior to his death, they had lived together on a partly leasehold and partly freehold property owned by him, and after his death the respondent continued to live there, employed and paid the servants, and kept up the grounds.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-31', 'TAXATION'),
(6546, 'Jacoby v Prison Commissioners', '', '../links/cases/jacoby vs prison.pdf', 'Yes', 'Hart Leverton & Co', '1940', 'High Court', 'Jacoby v Prison Commissioners The plaintiff was committed to prison on remand, and, in consideration of a sum of 12s per week paid by him to the prison commissioners, was provided with a furnished cell, which contained, inter alia, a china chamber.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-04-17', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6547, 'Johnston v Charles Osenton & Co', '', '../links/cases/johnson vs charles.pdf', 'Yes', 'Gregory Rowcliffe & Co.,Gilbert H White & Co', '1940', 'High Court', 'Johnston v Charles Osenton & Co The plaintiff entrusted the defendants, a firm of estate agents, with the development of certain land as a housing estate. He subsequently brought an action against them for breach of contract and for negligence in performance of the obligations thus undertaken, alleging that they had been negligent in many matters in connection with the lay-out of the estate, more especially in respect of the system of drainage recommended by them and the density of houses on the estate.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-04-15', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6548, 'Johnston v Charles Osenton & Co', '', '../links/cases/johnson vs charles.pdf', 'Yes', 'Gregory Rowcliffe & Co.,Gilbert H White & Co', '1940', 'High Court', 'Johnston v Charles Osenton & Co The plaintiff entrusted the defendants, a firm of estate agents, with the development of certain land as a housing estate. He subsequently brought an action against them for breach of contract and for negligence in performance of the obligations thus undertaken, alleging that they had been negligent in many matters in connection with the lay-out of the estate, more especially in respect of the system of drainage recommended by them and the density of houses on the estate.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-04-15', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE');
INSERT INTO `courtrulings` (`id`, `title`, `content`, `link`, `isshow`, `author`, `date`, `courttype`, `summary`, `presiding`, `casetype`, `subjectmatter`, `caseno`, `counsel1`, `counsel2`, `courtname`, `caseDate`, `subjectmattertitle`) VALUES
(6549, 'King Features Syndicate Inc and Segar v O and M Kleemann Ltd', '', '../links/cases/King vs O.pdf', 'Yes', 'Shaen Roscoe Massey & Co., Haslewood Hare & Co', '1940', 'High Court', 'King Features Syndicate Inc and Segar v O and M Kleemann Ltd S was the author of a large number of drawings or cartoons depicting as the central figure a grotesque and fictitious character known as “Popeyeâ€ or “Popeye the Sailor,â€ and it was admitted that if there was copyright in these drawings or cartoons, which were published from 1929 onwards in the United States of America and simultaneously in Canada, it was vested in the plaintiffs or one of them.', 'C M Young Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '0000-00-00', 'INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY'),
(6550, 'King Features Syndicate Inc and Segar v O and M Kleemann Ltd', '', '../links/cases/King vs O.pdf', 'Yes', 'Shaen Roscoe Massey & Co., Haslewood Hare & Co', '1940', 'High Court', 'King Features Syndicate Inc and Segar v O and M Kleemann Ltd S was the author of a large number of drawings or cartoons depicting as the central figure a grotesque and fictitious character known as “Popeyeâ€ or “Popeye the Sailor,â€ and it was admitted that if there was copyright in these drawings or cartoons, which were published from 1929 onwards in the United States of America and simultaneously in Canada, it was vested in the plaintiffs or one of them.', 'C M Young Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '0000-00-00', 'INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY'),
(6551, 'Mackenzie v Mackenzie', '', '../links/cases/makenzie vs makenzie.pdf', 'Yes', 'Walter Crimp & Co., Kitsons Hutchings Easterbrook & Co', '1940', 'High Court', 'Mackenzie v Mackenzie In an undefended petition for divorce on the ground of desertion, it appeared that in 1934 the petitioner had obtained from magistrates a maintenance order, which was in a printed form and included the words “that the complainant be no longer bound to cohabit with her husband.â€', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-17', 'FAMILY'),
(6552, 'Mackenzie v Mackenzie', '', '../links/cases/makenzie vs makenzie.pdf', 'Yes', 'Walter Crimp & Co., Kitsons Hutchings Easterbrook & Co', '1940', 'High Court', 'Mackenzie v Mackenzie In an undefended petition for divorce on the ground of desertion, it appeared that in 1934 the petitioner had obtained from magistrates a maintenance order, which was in a printed form and included the words “that the complainant be no longer bound to cohabit with her husband.â€', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-17', 'FAMILY'),
(6553, 'Maude v Inland Revenue Commissioners', '', '../links/cases/Maude vs Inland Revenue Commissioners.pdf', 'Yes', 'Wood Nash & Co', '1940', 'High Court', 'Maude v Inland Revenue Commissioners The appellant, a British subject resident in Guernsey, paid interest on an overdraft to the Guernsey branch of a bank having its head office in London. Her income liable to United Kingdom income tax exceeded the amount of the interest, and it was all paid into the Guernsey branch of the bank.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-06', 'BANKING AND FINANCE'),
(6554, 'McQuaker v Goddard', '', '../links/cases/McQuaher vs Goddard.pdf', 'Yes', 'Gordon Gardiner Kearton & Co., Watson Sons & Room', '1940', 'High Court', 'McQuaker v Goddard The appellant, while visiting a zoo owned by the respondent, had his hand bitten by a camel which he was in the act of feeding.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-08', 'ANIMALS '),
(6555, 'Mellor and Others v Australian Broadcasting Commission', '', '../links/cases/Mellor vs Australliian.pdf', 'Yes', 'Blundell Baker & Co., Routh Stacey & Castle', '1940', 'Supreme', 'Mellor and Others v Australian Broadcasting Commission The appellants carried on business as publishers of band music, and were the owners of the sole right of performing in public within Australia a large number of musical works arranged for brass and military bands.', 'Charles Newton Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-22', 'COMMONWEALTH'),
(6556, 'Menzies v United Motor Finance Corporation Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Menzie vs United Motors.pdf', 'Yes', 'Lewis & Raynes., Kinch & Richardson., Barrett & Thomson', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Menzies v United Motor Finance Corporation Ltd The appellant entered into a hire-purchase agreement, dated 18 October 1938, with the respondents, a finance corporation, in respect of a motor car. The appellant was the actual owner of the car, but in the agreement the respondents were described as owners, the object of the transaction being the making of an advance to the appellant on the security of her car.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-07', 'CONSUMER'),
(6557, 'Menzies v United Motor Finance Corporation Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Menzie vs United Motors.pdf', 'Yes', 'Lewis & Raynes., Kinch & Richardson., Barrett & Thomson', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Menzies v United Motor Finance Corporation Ltd The appellant entered into a hire-purchase agreement, dated 18 October 1938, with the respondents, a finance corporation, in respect of a motor car. The appellant was the actual owner of the car, but in the agreement the respondents were described as owners, the object of the transaction being the making of an advance to the appellant on the security of her car.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-07', 'CONSUMER'),
(6558, 'Middlesex County Council v Essex County Council', '', '../links/cases/Middelsex country vs Essex country council.pdf', 'Yes', 'Sharpe Pritchard & Co,', '1940', 'High Court', 'Middlesex County Council v Essex County Council From the date of their marriage, 22 August 1918, to 27 June 1922, a husband and his wife resided in the county of London without interruption, and without receiving poor relief. There were three children of the marriage, none of whom had attained the age of 16 and none of whom was blind or deaf or dumb.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-09', 'FAMILY'),
(6559, 'N V Amsterdamsche Lucifersfabrieken v H & H Trading Agencies Ltd', '', '../links/cases/N vs AM.pdf', 'Yes', 'Theodore Bell Cotton & Curtis., J N Nabarro & Sons', '1940', 'High Court', 'N V Amsterdamsche Lucifersfabrieken v H & H Trading Agencies Ltd In an action which was remitted to the county court, the defendants in their defence admitted the plaintiffs’ claim. There was, however, a counterclaim, which was the subject of dispute, the defendants ultimately succeeding on the counterclaim, though for a smaller amount than that claimed.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-12', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6560, 'N V Amsterdamsche Lucifersfabrieken v H & H Trading Agencies Ltd', '', '../links/cases/N vs AM.pdf', 'Yes', 'Theodore Bell Cotton & Curtis., J N Nabarro & Sons', '1940', 'High Court', 'N V Amsterdamsche Lucifersfabrieken v H & H Trading Agencies Ltd In an action which was remitted to the county court, the defendants in their defence admitted the plaintiffs’ claim. There was, however, a counterclaim, which was the subject of dispute, the defendants ultimately succeeding on the counterclaim, though for a smaller amount than that claimed.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-12', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6561, 'Naas v Westminster Bank Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Nass vs Westminster bank.pdf', 'Yes', 'Bircham & Co., Murray Hutchins & Co', '1940', 'High Court', 'Naas v Westminster Bank Ltd In a deed executed in 1923, A covenanted to pay B a weekly sum to be applied to the maintenance of herself and a son then expected to be, and afterwards in fact, born. By that deed, A had an option to execute a settlement by which similar benefits should be secured to B and the son, such settlement to be in satisfaction of the weekly sum payable under the deed.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-06', 'TRUSTS'),
(6562, 'Murrell SS Co Ltd v Nordenfjeldske Steamship Services Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Norwell vs Norden.pdf', 'Yes', 'Constant & Constant., Sinclair Roche & Temperley., Temperley Tilly & Hayward', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Murrell SS Co Ltd v Nordenfjeldske Steamship Services Ltd The respondents owned the Thurston, a ship which was chartered by them to the appellants for the purpose of transporting a cargo of fresh fruit from Spain to England.', 'W E Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-01', 'SHIPPING'),
(6563, 'Perry v South Metropolitan Gas Co', '', '../links/cases/Perry vs South.pdf', 'Yes', 'Randolph & Dean., Hicklin Washington & Pasmore', '1940', 'High Court', 'Perry v South Metropolitan Gas Co The occupier of business premises was supplied by the defendants with gas through a slot meter. She also rented certain pans, stoves and other utensils from them, and was in arrears with her payments of rent in respect of these utensils to the amount of £62 15s 5d.', 'Charles Newton Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-23', 'ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE'),
(6564, 'Perry v South Metropolitan Gas Co', '', '../links/cases/Perry vs South.pdf', 'Yes', 'Randolph & Dean., Hicklin Washington & Pasmore', '1940', 'High Court', 'Perry v South Metropolitan Gas Co The occupier of business premises was supplied by the defendants with gas through a slot meter. She also rented certain pans, stoves and other utensils from them, and was in arrears with her payments of rent in respect of these utensils to the amount of £62 15s 5d.', 'Charles Newton Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-23', 'ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE'),
(6565, 'Pratt v Cook Son & Co (St Paul’s) Ltd', '', '../links/cases/pratt vs cook son.pdf', 'Yes', 'Corbin Greener & Cook., J N Mason & Co', '1940', 'High Court', 'Pratt v Cook Son & Co (St Paul’s) Ltd The plaintiff was employed from 8 March 1920 to 1 December 1935, as a packer by a firm of wholesale drapers at a weekly wage of 53s, and it was agreed that dinner and tea supplied by the firm were worth an additional 10s per week.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-08', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6566, 'Pratt v Cook Son & Co (St Paul’s) Ltd', '', '../links/cases/pratt vs cook son.pdf', 'Yes', 'Corbin Greener & Cook., J N Mason & Co', '1940', 'High Court', 'Pratt v Cook Son & Co (St Paul’s) Ltd The plaintiff was employed from 8 March 1920 to 1 December 1935, as a packer by a firm of wholesale drapers at a weekly wage of 53s, and it was agreed that dinner and tea supplied by the firm were worth an additional 10s per week.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-08', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6567, 'Public Trustee v Pearlberg', '', '../links/cases/Public Trustee vs Pearlberg.pdf', 'Yes', 'Linsley-Thomas Heald & Co., Hewitt Woollacott & Chown., T H Scholfield & Co', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Public Trustee v Pearlberg By an agreement dated 29 January 1932, the appellant contracted to purchase a property for £2,400, of which £240 was then paid as a deposit. Clause 27 provided that, if the purchaser should neglect, or fail to comply with, the conditions of sale, the vendor might “give him notice in writing to remedy such neglect or failure, and if after the expiration of 14 days from the receipt of such notice the purchaser shall still be in default, his deposit may be absolutely forfeited to the vendor and the contract rescinded.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-03-06', 'LAND '),
(6568, 'Public Trustee v Pearlberg', '', '../links/cases/Public Trustee vs Pearlberg.pdf', 'Yes', 'Linsley-Thomas Heald & Co., Hewitt Woollacott & Chown., T H Scholfield & Co', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Public Trustee v Pearlberg By an agreement dated 29 January 1932, the appellant contracted to purchase a property for £2,400, of which £240 was then paid as a deposit. Clause 27 provided that, if the purchaser should neglect, or fail to comply with, the conditions of sale, the vendor might “give him notice in writing to remedy such neglect or failure, and if after the expiration of 14 days from the receipt of such notice the purchaser shall still be in default, his deposit may be absolutely forfeited to the vendor and the contract rescinded.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-03-06', 'LAND '),
(6569, 'R v Cronin', '', '../links/cases/R vs Cronin.pdf', 'Yes', 'Partridge & Wilson', '1940', 'High Court', 'R v Cronin The appellant was convicted at a borough quarter sessions of dangerous driving after a trial before one D, who was purporting to act as deputy recorder by virtue of an appointment in writing under the hand of the recorder, who was himself unable to be present.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-26', 'CRIMINAL LAW '),
(6570, 'R v Day', '', '../links/cases/R vs Day.pdf', 'Yes', 'Hughes Narborough & Thomas.,', '1940', 'High Court', 'R v Day The appellant was convicted of forging a cheque for £5. The prosecution’s case depended entirely upon the evidence of an accomplice, D, who had been convicted previously of the theft of the cheque form used in the commission of the forgery.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-24', 'CRIMINAL LAW '),
(6571, 'Rappaport v London Plywood and Timber Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Rappaport vs London.pdf', 'Yes', 'Alec Woolf & Turk., Rundle & Hobrow', '1940', 'High Court', 'Rappaport v London Plywood and Timber Co Ltd The plaintiff had, before the coming into operation of the Control of Timber (No 1) Order 1939, purchased certain timber (and it was held that the property in the timber had passed to him), but had not taken delivery, the timber being left in the warehouses at the docks with the defendants’ other stock.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-08', 'SALE OF GOODS'),
(6572, 'Re Birchall, Re Valentine, Kennedy v Birchall', '', '../links/cases/Re Birchall vs Birchall.pdf', 'Yes', 'Percy Haseldine & Co.,Wilfrid Taylor & Hindle., Leo Kennedy & Glover', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Re Birchall, Re Valentine, Kennedy v Birchall A testatrix left property on trust for her children living at her death, and, if any such child “shall die in my lifetime leaving a child or children living at my death who being male shall attain the age of 21 years or being female attain that age or marry,â€ the parent’s share was to be taken by the grandchildren as though such child had survived the testatrix', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-14', 'SUCCESSION'),
(6573, 'Re Davies’ Contract', '', '../links/cases/Re davis.pdf', 'Yes', 'Gustavus Thompson & Sons., Wrentmore & Son', '1940', 'High Court', 'Re Davies’ Contract Under a contract, dated 16 December 1937, the appellant agreed to purchase from the respondent certain land for £8,500, the contract to be completed on 25 October 1939.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-19', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6574, 'Re Henderson, Public Trustee v Reddie and Others', '', '../links/cases/Re Henderson vs Reddie.pdf', 'Yes', 'Waltons & Co., R S Fraser & Co', '1940', 'Commercial Cour', 'Re Henderson, Public Trustee v Reddie and Others By his will, dated 18 June 1907, the testator directed his trustees, inter alia, to set apart the sum of £150,000 and to invest the same and pay the income thereof to one B during her life, and after her death to raise out of that fund the sum of £100,000 to be held upon trust for the upkeep of a certain house which the testator desired to be used as a convalescent home.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-22', 'SUCCESSION'),
(6575, 'Re James Millward & Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Re James vs co ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Saville Bailey & Scott', '1940', 'High Court', 'Re James Millward & Co Ltd It has generally been understood that the Act of 1929 extended the rights of a judgment creditor in this matter and gave him an absolute right to a compulsory order. The Court of Appeal have confirmed this view, but it was not accepted in the court of first instance.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-23', 'COMPANY'),
(6576, 'Re Royce, Turner v Wormald and Others', '', '../links/cases/Re joyce vs Wormald.pdf', 'Yes', 'Field Roscoe & Co.,Horne & Birkett., Peacock & Goddard', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Re Royce, Turner v Wormald and Others The testator by his will gave a legacy of £1,000 to the vicar and churchwardens of a church “for the benefit of the choir.â€ He also gave a one-fifth share of his residuary estate for the same purpose, the remaining shares of the residuary estate being given to various charities', 'Charles Newton Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-03-19', 'CHARITIES'),
(6577, 'Re Judgment Debtor (No 266 of 1940), Judgment Creditors v Judgment Debtor', '', '../links/cases/Re JUdgement vs judgement.pdf', 'Yes', 'WWoolfe & Woolfe', '1940', 'High Court', 'Re Judgment Debtor (No 266 of 1940), Judgment Creditors v Judgment Debtor An order under the Courts (Emergency Powers) Act 1939, s 1, gave the judgment creditor leave to enforce the judgment, but provided for a stay of execution if the debtor paid £10 “on Feb. 1, 1940, and £10 per month thereafter.â€', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-04-05', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6578, 'RE KU', '', '', 'Yes', '', '1940', 'Supreme', '', '', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-25', 'LOCAL GOVERNMENT'),
(6579, 'RE LUCK', '', '../links/cases/re luck vs luck.pdf', 'Yes', 'Stibbard Gibson & Co., Crane & Hawkins', '1940', 'High Court', 'RE LUCK  The S Market, which was owned by the appellant council, was an approved certification centre for the purposes of the Cattle Subsidy Scheme 1937.', 'F Honig Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-25', 'LOCAL GOVERNMENT'),
(6580, 'Re Payne, Poplett and Another v Attorney-General', '', '../links/cases/Re Payne vs Attorney General.pdf', 'Yes', 'Wilkinson Howlett & Moorhouse', '1940', 'High Court', 'Re Payne, Poplett and Another v Attorney-General In January 1936, the settlor, by a declaration of trust, settled £10,000 and an option to acquire shares in a company in which he was interested upon trust to hold the same for the benefit of certain members of his family.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-03-19', 'SUCCESSION'),
(6581, 'Re Sykes, Younghouse v Sykes and Others', '', '../links/cases/Re Syke vs syke.pdf', 'Yes', 'Skelton & Co.,Mathews & Co., Taylor Kirkman & Mainprice', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Re Sykes, Younghouse v Sykes and Others The testator by his will dated 15 February 1911, gave his son an option to purchase certain shares upon the death of the testator’s wife or previously thereto whenever the trustees should proceed to realise that part of his estate.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-04-11', 'SUCCESSION'),
(6582, 'Re T H Downing & Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Re TH.pdf', 'Yes', 'Robinson & Bradley., Roscoe & Co,Kingsford Dorman & Co,Whetstone & Frost', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Re T H Downing & Co Ltd A scheme of arrangement and reconstruction must be construed as not altering existing rights unless the language of the scheme and the new articles of association giving effect to it are such as to compel that interpretation.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-24', 'COMPANY'),
(6583, 'RE vs DE', '', '../links/cases/Re vs De.pdf', 'Yes', 'Burton & Ramsden., H E Blaiberg', '1940', 'Appeal', 'RE vs DE  The testator by his will declared that, “should any child or grandchild of [his] at any time … marry any person not of the Jewish faith,â€ such child or grandchild should forfeit his or her interest under the will or any codicil thereto.', 'Charles Newton Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-28', 'SUCCESSION'),
(6584, 'Re Zakon, Trustee in Bankruptcy v Bushell', '', '../links/cases/re zuckn vs bushell.pdf', 'Yes', 'Zeffertt & Heard., McKenna & Co', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Re Zakon, Trustee in Bankruptcy v Bushell In November 1938, the bankrupt executed a deed of arrangement which remained ineffective owing to a refusal on the part of the creditors to assent to it. On 5 January 1939, a receiving order was made against him, and the applicant was appointed trustee in bankruptcy.', 'F Honig Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-15', 'BANKRUPTCY'),
(6585, 'Redditch Benefit Building Society v Roberts', '', '../links/cases/Redditch vs Roberts.pdf', 'Yes', 'Stanley Moore & Partners., Long & Gardiner', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Redditch Benefit Building Society v Roberts A building society took proceedings against a mortgagor to recover the amount of the mortgage debt and possession of the property. The defendant failed to enter an appearance within the prescribed time, but subsequently appeared before the registrar on an application by the building society for leave to enter judgment in default of appearance, and then intimated his desire to enter an appearance.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-26', 'PRACTICE DIRECTIONS'),
(6586, 'Rippon v Port of London Authority and J Russell & Co (Port of London Authority, Third Party)', '', '../links/cases/Rippon vs Port.pdf', 'Yes', 'Shaen Roscoe Massey & Co., Blount Petre & Co', '1940', 'High Court', 'Rippon v Port of London Authority and J Russell & Co (Port of London Authority, Third Party) The first defendants were the owners of a public dry-dock and the second defendants were a firm of ship repairers who were repairing a vessel lying in the dock. The plaintiff, an employee of the second defendants, was walking down some steps into the dock, in order to reach the bottom of the ship, when one of the steps gave way under his weight.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-31', 'TORTS'),
(6587, 'Rubie v Faulkner', '', '../links/cases/rubi vs faulkner.pdf', 'Yes', 'D R W Stevenson Squires & Co., E Tinsley, Chelmsford', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Rubie v Faulkner The owner of a motor vehicle, who held a provisional licence issued to him under the Road Traffic Act 1930, s 5(3), and whose vehicle displayed the “Lâ€ sign in accordance with the Motor Vehicles (Driving Licences) Regulations 1937, reg 16(3)(c), was driving it on a certain road.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-19', 'CRIMINAL LAW '),
(6588, 'Scott v Frank F Scott (London) Ltd and Others', '', '../links/cases/scott vs frank.pdf', 'Yes', 'Field Roscoe & Co., Williams & Co,., Layton & Co', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Scott v Frank F Scott (London) Ltd and Others The plaintiff was the sole executrix and beneficiary under the will of her husband, who had held 100 ordinary shares in the defendant company, the remaining ordinary shares being held by his two brothers, the personal defendants to this action.', 'F Honig Esq Barrister', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-16', 'COMPANY'),
(6589, 'Seviour v Somerset Collieries Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Seviour vs Somerset.pdf', 'Yes', 'Arthur Taylor & Co., Titley Long Taylor & Denning', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Seviour v Somerset Collieries Ltd The workman, a lad of 19 employed as a carting-boy, stated that he was walking along a haulage road when he was struck by a tub and injured, but the county court judge found that he was riding on the journey.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-16', 'HEALTH'),
(6590, 'Shop Investments Ltd v Sweet', '', '../links/cases/Shop Investment Ltd vs sweet.pdf', 'Yes', 'Wigram & Co', '1940', 'High Court', 'Shop Investments Ltd v Sweet The appellant company granted a lease of cinema premises for 42 years at a yearly rent of £2,285, which rent included payment for the use of a considerable amount of furniture in the cinema. The lease contained a covenant by the lessees to keep the furniture in repair, and, if necessary, to replace it, and to hand it back at the end of the term.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-29', 'TAXATION'),
(6591, 'Webb v Frank Bevis Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Skelt v Norwich Benefit Building Society.pdf', 'Yes', 'Gordon Gardiner Kearton & Co.,Bramsdon & Childs., Mills & Morley', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Webb v Frank Bevis Ltd The appellant company was in occupation of part of land held by the respondent on lease from the War Office. The respondent had covenanted that he would, at the end of his term, at his own expense remove all buildings and erections and restore the land to its original state.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-15', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6592, 'Sotherden v Sotherden', '', '../links/cases/sotherden vs sotherden.pdf', 'Yes', 'Montagu’s and Cox & Cardale., Snell & Co', '1940', 'High Court', 'Sotherden v Sotherden The wife was in 1931 admitted to a mental hospital and was detained until 1936. The husband visited her on two or three occasions up to the end of 1932, when he left his then abode and was not heard of thereafter.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-17', 'FAMILY'),
(6593, 'Thornton v Mitchell', '', '../links/cases/Thornton vs Mitchell.pdf', 'Yes', 'Norton Rose Greenwell & Co., J Bright Clegg & Son., Pattinson & Brewer', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Thornton v Mitchell A motor-omnibus driver was charged under the Road Traffic Act 1930, s 12(1), with driving a motor omnibus without due care and attention, and with driving without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-17', 'CRIMINAL LAW '),
(6594, 'Toogood v Wright', '', '../links/cases/Toogood vds Wright.pdf', 'Yes', 'Russell Jones & Co.,Pearlman & Rosen', '1940', 'High Court', 'Toogood v Wright The plaintiff was bitten by one of two racing greyhounds who were in the charge of two boys aged 10 and 12 years respectively. The greyhounds were at the time in a 10-ft way, which, though freely used by the public, was not in fact a highway.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-04-05', 'ANIMALS '),
(6595, 'Trebanog Working Men’s Club and Institute Ltd v Macdonald', '', '../links/cases/Trebanog vs Macdonald.pdf', 'Yes', 'Wrentmore & Son., Torr & Co., Wrentmore & Son., Edward T Davies & Son,', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Trebanog Working Men’s Club and Institute Ltd v Macdonald The appellant society was registered under the Industrial and Provident Societies Acts 1893 to 1913, and its objects, as set out in its rules, were to carry on the business of club proprietors by providing for the use of its members, and for such associates of the club as were admitted to honorary membership, the means of social intercourse, mutual helpfulness, mental and moral improvement, rational recreation, and the other advantages of a club.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister.', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-09', 'LEISURE AND LICENSING'),
(6596, 'Unsworth v Elder Dempster Lines Ltd', '', '../links/cases/unsworth vs elder.pdf', 'Yes', 'Silverman & Livermore., Lawrence Jones & Co., Williams & Co', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Unsworth v Elder Dempster Lines Ltd On 8 March 1938, the appellant was injured in the course of his employment, and such injury was admittedly due to a breach of statutory duty by the defendants.', 'Derek H Kitchin Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-23', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6597, 'Webb v Frank Bevis Ltd', '', '../links/cases/web vs frank.pdf', 'Yes', 'Gordon Gardiner Kearton & Co., Mills & Morley., Bramsdon & Childs', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Webb v Frank Bevis Ltd The appellant company was in occupation of part of land held by the respondent on lease from the War Office. The respondent had covenanted that he would, at the end of his term, at his own expense remove all buildings and erections and restore the land to its original state.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-15', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6598, 'Wilson v London, Midland & Scottish Railway Co', '', '../links/cases/Wilson vs London.pdf', 'Yes', 'Alexander Eddy', '1940', 'Supreme', 'Wilson v London, Midland & Scottish Railway Co The directors of the respondent company before an annual meeting sent to stockholders holding stock of the value of £2,500 and over stamped proxies filled in with the names of the directors.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-02-28', 'COMPANY'),
(6599, 'Wimborne and Cranborne Rural District Council v East Dorset Assessment Committee', '', '../links/cases/wimborn vs east dorset.pdf', 'Yes', 'Barnes & Butler., J W Miller & Son., Peacock & Goddard., Luff Raymond & Williams', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Wimborne and Cranborne Rural District Council v East Dorset Assessment Committee A occupied a farm comprising 11 fields, which, as an agricultural hereditament, did not appear in the valuation list. At all material times, one of the fields was used by A for pasturing cattle in connection with his business as a farmer, but, on 2 afternoons in 1937 and on 4 afternoons in 1938, the field was used by a motor cycle and light car club for the holding of motor-cycle grass track race meetings, when the charge for admission was 1s per head, and in addition charges were made for motor cars, motor cycles and bicycles taken into the field or parked in the adjoining field.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-18', 'LOCAL GOVERNMENT'),
(6600, 'Wimborne and Cranborne Rural District Council v East Dorset Assessment Committee', '', '../links/cases/wimborn vs east dorset.pdf', 'Yes', 'Barnes & Butler., J W Miller & Son., Peacock & Goddard., Luff Raymond & Williams', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Wimborne and Cranborne Rural District Council v East Dorset Assessment Committee A occupied a farm comprising 11 fields, which, as an agricultural hereditament, did not appear in the valuation list. At all material times, one of the fields was used by A for pasturing cattle in connection with his business as a farmer, but, on 2 afternoons in 1937 and on 4 afternoons in 1938, the field was used by a motor cycle and light car club for the holding of motor-cycle grass track race meetings, when the charge for admission was 1s per head, and in addition charges were made for motor cars, motor cycles and bicycles taken into the field or parked in the adjoining field.', 'Michael Marcus Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-01-18', 'LOCAL GOVERNMENT'),
(6601, 'Luff Raymond & Williams', '', '../links/cases/Adams v Adams.pdf', 'Yes', 'Wontner & Sons., Ludlow & Co', '1941', 'Supreme', 'Luff Raymond & Williams The appellant married the respondent in 1936. The following year the parties separated and a common\r\nform separation agreement, dated 11 October 1937, was signed. It provided that the appellant should\r\npay his wife £1 weekly during their joint lives.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-02-24', 'FAMILY'),
(6602, 'Allchin v Coulthard (Treasurer of the County Borough of South Shields', '', '../links/cases/Allchin v Coulthard.pdf', 'Yes', 'Speechly Mumford & Craig., Ayrey, Town Clerk', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Allchin v Coulthard (Treasurer of the County Borough of South Shields By the South Shields Corporation Act 1935, s 112, all the receipts of the borough were carried into the general rate fund, out of which all its liabilities were discharged. Section 113 of that Act required the corporation to keep separate accounts for its various undertakings, and ss 114 and 115 of the same Act enabled the corporation to apply from the rate fund to specified purposes in connection with its undertakings a sum not exceeding the excess revenue, if any, earned by that undertaking.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-10-13', 'TAXATION'),
(6603, 'Allchin v Coulthard (Treasurer of the County Borough of South Shields', '', '../links/cases/Allchin v Coulthard.pdf', 'Yes', 'Speechly Mumford & Craig., Ayrey, Town Clerk', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Allchin v Coulthard (Treasurer of the County Borough of South Shields By the South Shields Corporation Act 1935, s 112, all the receipts of the borough were carried into the general rate fund, out of which all its liabilities were discharged. Section 113 of that Act required the corporation to keep separate accounts for its various undertakings, and ss 114 and 115 of the same Act enabled the corporation to apply from the rate fund to specified purposes in connection with its undertakings a sum not exceeding the excess revenue, if any, earned by that undertaking.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-10-13', 'TAXATION'),
(6604, 'Attorney-General v Kitchin and Others', '', '../links/cases/Attorney-General vrs Liverpool Cooperation.pdf', 'Yes', 'S F Miller Mathews & Co', '1941', 'Supreme', 'Attorney-General v Kitchin and Others On 18 November 1921, B made an irrevocable voluntary settlement of shares in an American company in favour, inter alia, of certain of his sisters and nephews. On 28 August 1922, the trustee sold the trust property to an English company in return for shares and debentures therein. B then recollected that he was under a liability to his deceased brother’s estate, and was also dissatisfied with the settlement on the ground that it was irrevocable.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-01', 'TAXATION'),
(6605, 'B S Lyle Ltd v Pearson and Medlycott', '', '../links/cases/B S Lyle Ltd v Pearson and Medlycott.pdf', 'Yes', 'Arthur Dollond & Co., M A Jacobs & Sons', '1941', 'Supreme', 'B S Lyle Ltd v Pearson and Medlycott The plaintiffs, registered moneylenders, lent a borrower £100 on 14 March 1939, on a joint promissory note of the borrower and a surety, the interest being 150 per cent per annum. On 13 June 1939, a further £200 upon the same terms was borrowed. At some time prior to 1 January 1940, a sum of £75 was repaid.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-07-23', 'BANKING AND FINANCE'),
(6606, 'BAAFOUR KWAME FANTE ADUAMOA vs NANA GYAKORANG ADU TWUM', '', '../links/cases/BAAFOUR KWAME FANTE ADUAMOA.pdf', 'Yes', 'Bamford-Addo (Mrs.) J.S.C. Ampiah, J.S.C. Adjabeng, J.S.C Acquah, J.S.C Atuguba, J.S.C Akuffo (Ms.) J.S.C.', '1941', 'Appeal', 'BAAFOUR KWAME FANTE ADUAMOA vs NANA GYAKORANG ADU TWUM This special jurisdiction is not meant to usurp, or to be resorted to in place of, any of the jurisdictions of a\r\nlower court. In other words, where our said jurisdiction has been invoked in an action which properly falls\r\nwithin a particular course of action at a lower court, this court shall refuse to assume jurisdiction in that\r\naction, notwithstanding the fact that it has been presented as an interpretation and/or enforcement suit.', 'Wiredu', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-01', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6607, 'BAAFOUR KWAME FANTE ADUAMOA vs NANA GYAKORANG ADU TWUM', '', '../links/cases/BAAFOUR KWAME FANTE ADUAMOA.pdf', 'Yes', 'Bamford-Addo (Mrs.) J.S.C. Ampiah, J.S.C. Adjabeng, J.S.C Acquah, J.S.C Atuguba, J.S.C Akuffo (Ms.) J.S.C.', '1941', 'Appeal', 'BAAFOUR KWAME FANTE ADUAMOA vs NANA GYAKORANG ADU TWUM This special jurisdiction is not meant to usurp, or to be resorted to in place of, any of the jurisdictions of a\r\nlower court. In other words, where our said jurisdiction has been invoked in an action which properly falls\r\nwithin a particular course of action at a lower court, this court shall refuse to assume jurisdiction in that\r\naction, notwithstanding the fact that it has been presented as an interpretation and/or enforcement suit.', 'Wiredu', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-01', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6608, 'Barnard and Another v Gorman', '', '../links/cases/Barnard and Another v Gorman.pdf', 'Yes', 'Silverman & Livermore., Lawrence Jones & Co., Williams & Co', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Barnard and Another v Gorman The respondent, a ship’s steward, arrived in Liverpool on 4 July 1938, from Burma. The two appellants were preventive Customs officers. On 5 July they detained the respondent, took him to the police court, and there charged him with knowingly harbouring uncustomed goods consisting of a box of cigars, with intent to evade the payment of duty thereon, contrary to the Customs Consolidation Act 1876, s 186. He was detained in custody for some hours before being released on bail.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-07-31', 'CRIMINAL LAW '),
(6609, 'Barrett and Russell’s Gravesend Brewery Ltd v Gravesend Assessment Committee', '', '../links/cases/Barrett and Russell.pdf', 'Yes', 'Godden Holme & Ward., Solicitor of Customs and Excise., Cameron Kemm & Co', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Barrett and Russell’s Gravesend Brewery Ltd v Gravesend Assessment Committee On 24 January 1940, the rating authority made a proposal to increase the rateable value of certain licensed premises founded on the decision of the House of Lords in Robinson Bros (Brewers) Ltd v Durham County Assessment Committee.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-08', 'LOCAL GOVERNMENT'),
(6610, 'Batting v London Passenger Transport Board', '', '../links/cases/Batting v London Passenger Transport Board.pdf', 'Yes', 'Arthur Dollond & Co., R B McDonald', '1941', 'High Court', 'Batting v London Passenger Transport Board The plaintiff was injured in an accident on 11 December 1939. On 19 April 1940, she issued a writ\r\nagainst the defendants, who were admittedly a public authority and entitled to the protection given by\r\nthe Public Authorities Protection Act 1893.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-01-20', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6611, 'Benson v Benson (by her Guardian', '', '../links/cases/Benson v Benson.pdf', 'Yes', 'Helder Roberts Giles & Co., John A Behn Twyford & Reece', '1941', 'High Court', 'Benson v Benson (by her Guardian The Matrimonial Causes Act 1937, requires for the purposes of divorce that a person shall have been continuously under care and treatment for a period of at least 5 years. A person is deemed to be under care and treatment while he is receiving treatment as a voluntary patient, provided that the period of such detention follows immediately after detention under an order.', 'D Armstead Fairweather Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-14', 'FAMILY'),
(6612, 'Black and Black v Mileham', '', '../links/cases/Black and Black v Mileham.pdf', 'Yes', 'C A Boulton', '1941', 'Supreme', 'Black and Black v Mileham The respondent was tenant of a flat which suffered damage by enemy action on 24 October 1940. He negotiated with the appellants’ agents to have the damage made good, but no repairs were done.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-10-14', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6613, 'Board of Education for City of Windsor v Ford Motor Co of Canada Ltd and Others', '', '../links/cases/Board of Education for City of Windsor v Ford Motor Co of Canada Ltd and Others.pdf', 'Yes', 'Lawrence Jones & Co., Blake & Redden', '1941', 'High Court', 'Board of Education for City of Windsor v Ford Motor Co of Canada Ltd and Others The legislation of Ontario provides for the assessment of both individuals and corporations in respect of rates for educational purposes. In the absence of a notice by the person or corporation assessed these rates are applied for public education, but by the service of a proper notice a person or corporation may be assessed in respect of rates applied to the support of separate schools.', 'Hubert B Figg Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-07-30', 'COMMONWEALTH'),
(6614, 'Bomford v Osborne', '', '../links/cases/Bomford v Osborne.pdf', 'Yes', 'Ellis & Fairbairn., Ryland Martineau & Co.,', '1941', 'High Court', 'Bomford v Osborne On the point here considered, there was a dictum by Finlay J, (as he then was), in Dennis v Hick and a decision of the Court of Session in Scotland in Lowe v Inland Revenue Comrs. Lawrence J in deciding this case would have preferred the dictum of Finlay J but felt bound to follow the decision of the Scottish court.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-27', 'TAXATION'),
(6615, 'Boudou v Thornton Smith', '', '../links/cases/Boudou v Thornton Smith.pdf', 'Yes', 'Forsyte Kerman & Phillips., Harris Chetham & Cohen', '1941', 'High Court', 'Boudou v Thornton Smith Business premises let on lease were damaged by enemy action, and the lessee served a notice of\r\ndisclaimer. The landlord applied under the Landlord and Tenant (War Damage) Act 1939, s 6 for a\r\ndeclaration that the notice was of no effect on the ground that the premises were not “unfitâ€ within the\r\nmeaning of the Act.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-03-19', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6616, 'Bowmaker Ltd v Tabor', '', '../links/cases/Bowmaker Ltd v Tabor.pdf', 'Yes', 'Field Roscoe & Co., Stone & Stone', '1941', 'High Court', 'Bowmaker Ltd v Tabor The hirer of a motor car under a hire-purchase agreement after paying instalments amounting to more than half the purchase price agreed, on being pressed for arrears of the instalments, to surrender the car.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-04-08', 'CONSUMER'),
(6617, 'Bradford Third Equitable Benefit Building Society v Borders', '', '../links/cases/Bradford Third Equitable Benefit Building Society v Borders.pdf', 'Yes', 'H Boustred & Sons., J Eaton & Co, Bradford', '1941', 'High Court', 'Bradford Third Equitable Benefit Building Society v Borders The builders of houses on a building estate issued a brochure to an intending purchaser containing assertions, contrary to the truth, that the houses were, or would be, particularly well built, and that a leading building society was prepared to advance no less than 95 per cent of the purchase price of the houses because they were so well built.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-09', 'BANKING AND FINANCE'),
(6618, 'Browne and Others v De Luxe Car Services and Birkenhead Corporation', '', '../links/cases/Bowmaker Ltd v Tabor.pdf', 'Yes', 'Field Roscoe & Co., Berkson & Berkson., Mayo Elder & Co., F Lees & Son', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Browne and Others v De Luxe Car Services and Birkenhead Corporation In 1932, the tram service along a certain road which had been operated by the corporation, the second\r\ndefendants, was discontinued. The tramlines were subsequently filled in with bitumen.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-02-21', 'TRANSPORT'),
(6619, 'Brueton v Woodward', '', '../links/cases/Brueton v Woodward.pdf', 'Yes', 'Leslie Marrison., Thomas Coates & Ensor', '1941', 'High Court', 'Brueton v Woodward The action in this case is of a type that was only too common some years ago, but the real issue on this\r\nhearing was the application of the Limitation Act 1939. The judgment sets out very clearly what actions\r\nwould be governed by the previous Acts, but as the writ in these cases must have been issued by 1 July\r\n1940, it is only in exceptional cases that that position will now arise.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-02-24', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6620, 'Butler Estates Ltd and Another v Bean and Another', '', '../links/cases/Butler Estates Ltd and Another v Bean and Another.pdf', 'Yes', 'R C Bartlett & Co., Preston Lane-Claypon & O’Kelly', '1941', 'High Court', 'Butler Estates Ltd and Another v Bean and Another On 22 June 1928, the plaintiffs let premises to G & R Ltd. On 5 December 1935, G & R Ltd, assigned the lease to the defendants, who, in the assignment, expressly convenanted to pay the rent and observe the tenant’s covenants in the lease.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-09', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6621, 'Adams v Adams', '', '../links/cases/Adams v Adams.pdf', 'Yes', 'Wontner & Sons., Ludlow & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Adams v Adams The appellant married the respondent in 1936. The following year the parties separated and a common\r\nform separation agreement, dated 11 October 1937, was signed. It provided that the appellant should\r\npay his wife £1 weekly during their joint lives.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-02-24', 'FAMILY'),
(6622, 'Allchin v Coulthard (Treasurer of the County Borough of South Shields)', '', '../links/cases/Allchin v Coulthard.pdf', 'Yes', 'Solicitor of Inland Revenue., Speechly Mumford & Craig', '1941', 'High Court', 'Allchin v Coulthard (Treasurer of the County Borough of South Shields) By the South Shields Corporation Act 1935, s 112, all the receipts of the borough were carried into the general rate fund, out of which all its liabilities were discharged.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-10-13', 'TAXATION'),
(6623, 'Benson v Benson (by her Guardian)', '', '../links/cases/Benson v Benson.pdf', 'Yes', 'Helder Roberts Giles & Co., Official Solicitor', '1941', 'High Court', 'Benson v Benson (by her Guardian) A wife was detained under a direction by the Board of Control in a mental hospital under the provisions of the Mental Treatment Act 1930, s 5.', 'D Armstead Fairweather Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-14', 'FAMILY'),
(6624, 'C Czarnikow Ltd v Java Sea and Fire Insurance Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/C Czarnikow Ltd v Java Sea and Fire Insurance Co Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Lawrance Messer & Co., William A Crump & Son', '1941', 'High Court', 'C Czarnikow Ltd v Java Sea and Fire Insurance Co Ltd The plaintiffs were interested as buyers in a cargo of copra (a perishable cargo if detained in a hot climate for any length of time) loaded on a German ship which, just before the outbreak of war, put into Massawa, an Italian port.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-07-30', 'INSURANCE'),
(6625, 'C Czarnikow Ltd v Java Sea and Fire Insurance Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/C Czarnikow Ltd v Java Sea and Fire Insurance Co Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Lawrance Messer & Co., William A Crump & Son', '1941', 'High Court', 'C Czarnikow Ltd v Java Sea and Fire Insurance Co Ltd The plaintiffs were interested as buyers in a cargo of copra (a perishable cargo if detained in a hot climate for any length of time) loaded on a German ship which, just before the outbreak of war, put into Massawa, an Italian port.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-07-30', 'INSURANCE'),
(6626, 'Campbell v Campbell and Lewis', '', '../links/cases/Campbell v Campbell and Lewis.pdf', 'Yes', 'Kenneth Brown Baker Baker., L A Hart', '1941', 'High Court', 'Campbell v Campbell and Lewis A husband obtained a decree of divorce and was ordered to pay his wife’s taxed costs. There had been a\r\ncross-petition by the wife and an intervention by an intervener. The intervener was dismissed from the\r\nsuit, and was given costs against the wife.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-02-05', 'PROFESSIONS'),
(6627, 'Campbell v Campbell and Lewis', '', '../links/cases/Campbell v Campbell and Lewis.pdf', 'Yes', 'Kenneth Brown Baker Baker., L A Hart', '1941', 'High Court', 'Campbell v Campbell and Lewis A husband obtained a decree of divorce and was ordered to pay his wife’s taxed costs. There had been a\r\ncross-petition by the wife and an intervention by an intervener. The intervener was dismissed from the\r\nsuit, and was given costs against the wife.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-02-05', 'PROFESSIONS'),
(6628, 'Caulfield v P W Pickup Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Caulfield v P W Pickup Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Oddie & Roebuck., Procter & Son', '1941', 'High Court', 'Caulfield v P W Pickup Ltd The deceased was killed by a fall of stone from the roof of a mine. The mine was one in which the coal was being won by mechanical cutters and placed on a conveyor belt for transmission along the haulage roads.', 'M D Chorlton Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-13', 'INDUSTRY'),
(6629, 'Caulfield v P W Pickup Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Caulfield v P W Pickup Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Oddie & Roebuck., Procter & Son', '1941', 'High Court', 'Caulfield v P W Pickup Ltd The deceased was killed by a fall of stone from the roof of a mine. The mine was one in which the coal was being won by mechanical cutters and placed on a conveyor belt for transmission along the haulage roads.', 'M D Chorlton Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-13', 'INDUSTRY'),
(6630, 'Chadburn v Chadburn', '', '../links/cases/Chadburn v Chadburn.pdf', 'Yes', 'White & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Chadburn v Chadburn This decision appears to remove a doubt as to the position in respect of judicial separation founded on\r\ndesertion. Before the passing of the 1937 Act the necessary period of desertion was two years. The\r\neffect of the passing of that Act seems to have been to increase that period to three years.', 'D Armstead Fairweather Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-02-26', 'FAMILY');
INSERT INTO `courtrulings` (`id`, `title`, `content`, `link`, `isshow`, `author`, `date`, `courttype`, `summary`, `presiding`, `casetype`, `subjectmatter`, `caseno`, `counsel1`, `counsel2`, `courtname`, `caseDate`, `subjectmattertitle`) VALUES
(6631, 'Chadburn v Chadburn', '', '../links/cases/Chadburn v Chadburn.pdf', 'Yes', 'White & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Chadburn v Chadburn This decision appears to remove a doubt as to the position in respect of judicial separation founded on\r\ndesertion. Before the passing of the 1937 Act the necessary period of desertion was two years. The\r\neffect of the passing of that Act seems to have been to increase that period to three years.', 'D Armstead Fairweather Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-02-26', 'FAMILY'),
(6632, 'Chadwick v Pioneer Private Telephone Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Chadwick v Pioneer Private Telephone Co Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Vaudrey Osborne & Mellor., Dunderdale Wignall & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Chadwick v Pioneer Private Telephone Co Ltd traveller was employed on the basis of payment of his expenses and commission on orders obtained. His employers failed to insure him under the National Health Insurance Act 1936.', 'M D Chorlton Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-03-12', 'TORTS'),
(6633, 'Chadwick v Pioneer Private Telephone Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Chadwick v Pioneer Private Telephone Co Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Vaudrey Osborne & Mellor., Dunderdale Wignall & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Chadwick v Pioneer Private Telephone Co Ltd traveller was employed on the basis of payment of his expenses and commission on orders obtained. His employers failed to insure him under the National Health Insurance Act 1936.', 'M D Chorlton Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-03-12', 'TORTS'),
(6634, 'Charles Osenton & Co v Johnston', '', '', 'Yes', 'Gregory Rowcliffe & Co., Gilbert H White & Co,', '1941', 'Supreme', 'Charles Osenton & Co v Johnston The plaintiff entrusted the defendants, the appellants in this appeal, with the development of certain land as a housing estate. He subsequently brought an action against them for breach of contract and for negligence in the performance of the obligations thus undertaken.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-09', 'ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE'),
(6635, 'Charles Osenton & Co v Johnston', '', '../links/cases/Charles Osenton.pdf', 'Yes', 'Gilbert H White & Co,Gregory Rowcliffe & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Charles Osenton & Co v Johnston The plaintiff entrusted the defendants, the appellants in this appeal, with the development of certain land as a housing estate. He subsequently brought an action against them for breach of contract and for negligence in the performance of the obligations thus undertaken.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-09', 'ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE'),
(6636, 'Chipchase v Chipchase (otherwise Leetch, otherwise Matthews', '', '../links/cases/Chipchase v Chipchase.pdf', 'Yes', 'Large & Co., Wingfields Halse & Trustram', '1941', 'High Court', 'Chipchase v Chipchase (otherwise Leetch, otherwise MatthewsThe respondent was married in 1915 Shortly afterwards her husband deserted her and she had not seen or heard of him since 1916. In 1928 she married the petitioner. For this marriage the banns were read in her maiden name and she was married in that name.', 'D Armstead Fairweather Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-06-12', 'FAMILY'),
(6637, 'Chipchase v Chipchase (otherwise Leetch, otherwise Matthews', '', '../links/cases/Chipchase v Chipchase.pdf', 'Yes', 'Large & Co., Wingfields Halse & Trustram', '1941', 'High Court', 'Chipchase v Chipchase (otherwise Leetch, otherwise MatthewsThe respondent was married in 1915 Shortly afterwards her husband deserted her and she had not seen or heard of him since 1916. In 1928 she married the petitioner. For this marriage the banns were read in her maiden name and she was married in that name.', 'D Armstead Fairweather Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-06-12', 'FAMILY'),
(6638, 'Cocker v Sheffield Corporation', '', '../links/cases/Cocker v Sheffield Corporation.pdf', 'Yes', 'Sharpe Pritchard & Co., E B Gibson, Town Clerk,', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Cocker v Sheffield Corporation The appellant entered the service of the respondents on 21 September 1938, as a non-resident nurse-attendant. In August 1939, the respondents adopted certain scales of pay for nurse-attendants, classifying them according to the length of their experience.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-04-08', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6639, 'Cocker v Sheffield Corporation', '', '../links/cases/Cocker v Sheffield Corporation.pdf', 'Yes', 'Sharpe Pritchard & Co., E B Gibson, Town Clerk,', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Cocker v Sheffield Corporation The appellant entered the service of the respondents on 21 September 1938, as a non-resident nurse-attendant. In August 1939, the respondents adopted certain scales of pay for nurse-attendants, classifying them according to the length of their experience.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-04-08', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6640, 'Cooper v Jax Stores Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Cooper v Jax Stores Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'T L Wilson & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Cooper v Jax Stores Ltd Premises were damaged by enemy action, and on 2 November 1940, the tenants served a notice of disclaimer. On 25 November, the landlord served a notice to avoid disclaimer.', 'Hubert B Figg Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-03-21', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6641, 'Corbett v Duff', '', '../links/cases/Corbett v Duff.pdf', 'Yes', 'Turner Osborn & Chatterton., T H Hinchcliffe & Son', '1941', 'High Court', 'Corbett v Duff The taxpayers were professional football players and had received in one case the proceeds of a benefit match and in the other cases sums stated to be accrued shares of benefit.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-03-26', 'TAXATION'),
(6642, 'Corbett v Duff', '', '../links/cases/Corbett v Duff.pdf', 'Yes', 'Turner Osborn & Chatterton., T H Hinchcliffe & Son', '1941', 'High Court', 'Corbett v Duff The taxpayers were professional football players and had received in one case the proceeds of a benefit match and in the other cases sums stated to be accrued shares of benefit.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-03-26', 'TAXATION'),
(6643, 'Cumper v Pothecary', '', '../links/cases/Cumper v Pothecary.pdf', 'Yes', 'L Bingham & Co., Crossman, Block & Co., Sharman & Trethewy', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Cumper v Pothecary In an action for personal injuries suffered by the deceased, the personal representative claimed certain expenses to which he had been put and damages for loss of expectation of life.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-09', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6644, 'Cumper v Pothecary', '', '../links/cases/Cumper v Pothecary.pdf', 'Yes', 'L Bingham & Co., Crossman, Block & Co., Sharman & Trethewy', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Cumper v Pothecary In an action for personal injuries suffered by the deceased, the personal representative claimed certain expenses to which he had been put and damages for loss of expectation of life.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-09', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6645, 'Dalton Main Collieries Ltd v Rossington Main Colliery Co Ltd, and Amalgamated Denaby Collieries Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Dalton Main Collieries Ltd v Rossington Main Colliery Co Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'T J Robinson & Son., H Fishman & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Dalton Main Collieries Ltd v Rossington Main Colliery Co Ltd, and Amalgamated Denaby Collieries Ltd The Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal from the judgment of Farwell J, reported [1940] 4 All ER 384, Sir Wilfrid Greene MR stating that the judgment of Farwell J commended itself to him and that he agreed with it.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-04-04', 'INDUSTRY'),
(6646, 'Dalton Main Collieries Ltd v Rossington Main Colliery Co Ltd, and Amalgamated Denaby Collieries Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Dalton Main Collieries Ltd v Rossington Main Colliery Co Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'T J Robinson & Son., H Fishman & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Dalton Main Collieries Ltd v Rossington Main Colliery Co Ltd, and Amalgamated Denaby Collieries Ltd The Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal from the judgment of Farwell J, reported [1940] 4 All ER 384, Sir Wilfrid Greene MR stating that the judgment of Farwell J commended itself to him and that he agreed with it.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-04-04', 'INDUSTRY'),
(6647, 'Davis v Cambrian Wagon Works Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Davis v Cambrian Wagon Works Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'James Turner & Son & Whitehouse,James Wilson & Kinsey', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Davis v Cambrian Wagon Works Ltd The employers on 7 August 1940, applied to redeem their liability to pay compensation to a workman.\r\nAt that time the workman had been receiving compensation at the rate of £1 8s 5d per week for more\r\nthan 6 months.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-01-31', 'em'),
(6648, 'Deane v H F Edwards & Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Deane v H F Edwards.pdf', 'Yes', 'P S Solomon Archer & Co., Blount Petre & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Deane v H F Edwards & Co Ltd The plaintiff was employed by the defendants as a garage hand, and in the course of his employment was instructed to take a motor vehicle from the ground floor by lift to the basement. The lift in question was operated by means of a rope loop set in motion by an electric motor, neither of which was fenced.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-12', 'HEALTH'),
(6649, 'Deane v H F Edwards & Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Deane v H F Edwards.pdf', 'Yes', 'P S Solomon Archer & Co., Blount Petre & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Deane v H F Edwards & Co Ltd The plaintiff was employed by the defendants as a garage hand, and in the course of his employment was instructed to take a motor vehicle from the ground floor by lift to the basement. The lift in question was operated by means of a rope loop set in motion by an electric motor, neither of which was fenced.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-12', 'HEALTH'),
(6650, 'Diamond v Minter and Others', '', '../links/cases/Diamond v Minter and Others.pdf', 'Yes', 'A Kramer & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Diamond v Minter and Others The plaintiff, an Australian, on his arrival in England from Sydney was arrested by two of the defendants,\r\nwho were police officers, and subsequently charged and detained by the third defendant, who was a\r\ndetective-inspector.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-02-21', 'INTERNATIONAL'),
(6651, 'Diamond v Minter and Others', '', '../links/cases/Diamond v Minter and Others.pdf', 'Yes', 'A Kramer & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Diamond v Minter and Others The plaintiff, an Australian, on his arrival in England from Sydney was arrested by two of the defendants,\r\nwho were police officers, and subsequently charged and detained by the third defendant, who was a\r\ndetective-inspector.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-02-21', 'INTERNATIONAL'),
(6652, 'Dillon v Public Trustee of New Zealand and Others', '', '../links/cases/Dillon v Public Trustee of New Zealand and Others.pdf', 'Yes', 'Wray Smith & Halford,Mackrell Maton Godlee & Quincey', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Dillon v Public Trustee of New Zealand and Others The appellant was the second wife of the testator, HD senior. At the time of the second marriage, HD senior was 81 and the appellant was 50 years of age. By his will, the testator appointed the Public Trustee of New Zealand to be his executor and trustee.', 'Hubert B Figg Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-00-04', 'COMMONWEALTH'),
(6653, 'Dillon v Public Trustee of New Zealand and Others', '', '../links/cases/Dillon v Public Trustee of New Zealand and Others.pdf', 'Yes', 'Wray Smith & Halford,Mackrell Maton Godlee & Quincey', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Dillon v Public Trustee of New Zealand and Others The appellant was the second wife of the testator, HD senior. At the time of the second marriage, HD senior was 81 and the appellant was 50 years of age. By his will, the testator appointed the Public Trustee of New Zealand to be his executor and trustee.', 'Hubert B Figg Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-00-04', 'COMMONWEALTH'),
(6654, 'Director of Public Prosecutions v A E Lamb and B Lamb', '', '../links/cases/Director of Public Prosecutions v A E Lamb and B Lamb.pdf', 'Yes', 'A M Longhurst & Butler', '1941', 'High Court', 'Director of Public Prosecutions v A E Lamb and B Lamb The four defendants were charged with certain currency offences committed between 3 September 1939, and 11 May 1940, and pleaded guilty. The information was dated 17 August 1940.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Criminal', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-04-08', 'CRIMINAL LAW '),
(6655, 'Dollman and Another v A & S Hillman Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Dollman and Another v A.pdf', 'Yes', 'Edgar H Hiscocks., The King’s Proctor', '1941', 'High Court', 'Dollman and Another v A & S Hillman Ltd In this case, the owners of the shop have been held both to have been negligent and to have caused a\r\nnuisance. So far as the case is based on negligence, the matter seems to be purely a question of fact.\r\nThe questions arising from the allegation of nuisance are more difficult.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-02-27', 'TORTS'),
(6656, 'Dollman and Another v A & S Hillman Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Dollman and Another v A.pdf', 'Yes', 'Edgar H Hiscocks., The King’s Proctor', '1941', 'High Court', 'Dollman and Another v A & S Hillman Ltd In this case, the owners of the shop have been held both to have been negligent and to have caused a\r\nnuisance. So far as the case is based on negligence, the matter seems to be purely a question of fact.\r\nThe questions arising from the allegation of nuisance are more difficult.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-02-27', 'TORTS'),
(6657, 'Doncaster Amalgamated Collieries Ltd v Leech', '', '../links/cases/Doncaster Amalgamated Collieries Ltd v Leech.pdf', 'Yes', 'Johnson Weatherall Sturt & Hardy., Corbin Greener & Cook', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Doncaster Amalgamated Collieries Ltd v Leech The employee of a colliery company met with an accident in 1938 and received a weekly sum as workmen’s compensation. While he was still partially incapacitated, he voluntarily joined the Army.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-04-03', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6658, 'Doncaster Amalgamated Collieries Ltd v Leech', '', '../links/cases/Doncaster Amalgamated Collieries Ltd v Leech.pdf', 'Yes', 'Johnson Weatherall Sturt & Hardy., Corbin Greener & Cook', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Doncaster Amalgamated Collieries Ltd v Leech The employee of a colliery company met with an accident in 1938 and received a weekly sum as workmen’s compensation. While he was still partially incapacitated, he voluntarily joined the Army.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-04-03', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6659, 'Drury v Victor Buckland Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Drury v Victor Buckland Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Flint Marsden & Bishop., King Wigg & Brightman,', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Drury v Victor Buckland Ltd The plaintiff was approached by an agent of the defendants with reference to the purchase of an icecream\r\nmaker. After some negotiation the plaintiff paid £10 10s 0d deposit to the defendants, and\r\nagreed to discharge the balance by paying a number of instalments to a finance company. Each of these\r\ninstalments included an interest charge.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-01-27', 'SALE OF GOODS'),
(6660, 'Drury v Victor Buckland Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Drury v Victor Buckland Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Flint Marsden & Bishop., King Wigg & Brightman,', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Drury v Victor Buckland Ltd The plaintiff was approached by an agent of the defendants with reference to the purchase of an icecream\r\nmaker. After some negotiation the plaintiff paid £10 10s 0d deposit to the defendants, and\r\nagreed to discharge the balance by paying a number of instalments to a finance company. Each of these\r\ninstalments included an interest charge.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-01-27', 'SALE OF GOODS'),
(6661, 'Duncan v Cammell Laird & Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Duncan v Cammell Laird.pdf', 'Yes', 'Evill & Coleman., Laces & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Duncan v Cammell Laird & Co Ltd The court has held that, if it is not a binding rule of law for the court to refuse to inspect the documents\r\nin such a case, it is certainly not the practice to do so. An affidavit by the Minister concerned stating that\r\nproduction is contrary to the public interest is conclusive.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-03-13', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6662, 'Duncan v Cammell Laird & Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Duncan v Cammell Laird.pdf', 'Yes', 'Evill & Coleman., Laces & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Duncan v Cammell Laird & Co Ltd The court has held that, if it is not a binding rule of law for the court to refuse to inspect the documents\r\nin such a case, it is certainly not the practice to do so. An affidavit by the Minister concerned stating that\r\nproduction is contrary to the public interest is conclusive.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-03-13', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6663, 'Executors of H Peters, deceased v Inland Revenue Commissioners', '', '../links/cases/Executors of H Peters.pdf', 'Yes', 'Waterhouse & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Executors of H Peters, deceased v Inland Revenue Commissioners A husband and wife agreed in May 1929, to live apart, it being also agreed, inter alia, that the wife was to be paid £850 per annum by monthly instalments. In 1932 this sum was reduced to £808 per annum and in 1933 it was further reduced to £764 per annum.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-06-18', 'TAXATION'),
(6664, 'Executors of H Peters, deceased v Inland Revenue Commissioners', '', '../links/cases/Executors of H Peters.pdf', 'Yes', 'Waterhouse & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Executors of H Peters, deceased v Inland Revenue Commissioners A husband and wife agreed in May 1929, to live apart, it being also agreed, inter alia, that the wife was to be paid £850 per annum by monthly instalments. In 1932 this sum was reduced to £808 per annum and in 1933 it was further reduced to £764 per annum.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-06-18', 'TAXATION'),
(6665, 'Fay v Miller, Wilkins & Co', '', '../links/cases/Fay v Miller.pdf', 'Yes', 'Pinsent & Co., Bernard Simmonds & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Fay v Miller, Wilkins & Co A firm of auctioneers received instructions to offer a house for sale by private treaty, the reserve price to be £750. They failed to find a purchaser and later received instructions to include the property in one of their auction sales.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-04-08', 'LAND '),
(6666, 'Foaminol Laboratories Ltd v British Artid Plastics Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Foaminol Laboratories Ltd v British Artid Plastics Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Birkbeck Julius Edwards & Co., Good Good & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Foaminol Laboratories Ltd v British Artid Plastics Ltd The plaintiffs contemplated putting on the market a summer cream for the use of ladies. This was to be supplied in small but attractive containers suitable for ladies to carry about in their handbags.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-09', 'CONTRACT'),
(6667, 'Foaminol Laboratories Ltd v British Artid Plastics Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Foaminol Laboratories Ltd v British Artid Plastics Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Birkbeck Julius Edwards & Co., Good Good & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Foaminol Laboratories Ltd v British Artid Plastics Ltd The plaintiffs contemplated putting on the market a summer cream for the use of ladies. This was to be supplied in small but attractive containers suitable for ladies to carry about in their handbags.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-09', 'CONTRACT'),
(6668, 'Fox v Newcastle-upon-Tyne City Council', '', '../links/cases/Fox v Newcastle.pdf', 'Yes', 'Collyer Bristow & Co., Ward Bowie & Co., Hodnett Parkin & Barker', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Fox v Newcastle-upon-Tyne City Council On the night of 26 September 1940, the respondent, while riding a pedal bicycle along a street in Newcastle-upon-Tyne, collided with an air-raid shelter which had been erected in the street by the appellant council.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-06-13', 'TORTS'),
(6669, 'Fox v Newcastle-upon-Tyne City Council', '', '../links/cases/Fox v Newcastle.pdf', 'Yes', 'Collyer Bristow & Co., Ward Bowie & Co., Hodnett Parkin & Barker', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Fox v Newcastle-upon-Tyne City Council On the night of 26 September 1940, the respondent, while riding a pedal bicycle along a street in Newcastle-upon-Tyne, collided with an air-raid shelter which had been erected in the street by the appellant council.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-06-13', 'TORTS'),
(6670, 'Franklin v Midland Bank Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Franklin v Midland Bank Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Page Moore & Page., Beale & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Franklin v Midland Bank Ltd A surety mortgaged certain property to secure the debt of the principal debtor, but entered into no personal covenant to pay any sum of money.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-02', 'LAND '),
(6671, 'Franklin v Midland Bank Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Franklin v Midland Bank Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Page Moore & Page., Beale & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Franklin v Midland Bank Ltd A surety mortgaged certain property to secure the debt of the principal debtor, but entered into no personal covenant to pay any sum of money.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-02', 'LAND '),
(6672, 'Fredensen v Rothschild', '', '../links/cases/Fredensen v Rothschild.pdf', 'Yes', 'J D Langton & Passmore., Dawes & Sons', '1941', 'High Court', 'Fredensen v Rothschild By a deed of covenant dated 5 July 1907, the settlor covenanted to pay the plaintiff “the clear yearly\r\nsum of £550.â€ By a settlement dated 28 October 1908, the settlor provided security for the performance\r\nof this covenant, which fact was unknown to the plaintiff for some years.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-03-13', 'CONTRACT'),
(6673, 'Fredensen v Rothschild', '', '../links/cases/Fredensen v Rothschild.pdf', 'Yes', 'J D Langton & Passmore., Dawes & Sons', '1941', 'High Court', 'Fredensen v Rothschild By a deed of covenant dated 5 July 1907, the settlor covenanted to pay the plaintiff “the clear yearly\r\nsum of £550.â€ By a settlement dated 28 October 1908, the settlor provided security for the performance\r\nof this covenant, which fact was unknown to the plaintiff for some years.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-03-13', 'CONTRACT'),
(6674, 'Gibson v Norfolk County Council', '', '../links/cases/Gibson v Norfolk County Council.pdf', 'Yes', 'McKenna & Co., Hatch & Hatch., H Christopher Davies', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Gibson v Norfolk County Council The applicant entered into a building agreement whereby he agreed to build four houses on a plot of\r\nland abutting on a trunk road. Under the agreement he would become entitled to leases of the 4 houses\r\nfor a term of 99 years.', 'A J Smith Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-01-16', 'TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING'),
(6675, 'Gibson v Norfolk County Council', '', '../links/cases/Gibson v Norfolk County Council.pdf', 'Yes', 'McKenna & Co., Hatch & Hatch., H Christopher Davies', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Gibson v Norfolk County Council The applicant entered into a building agreement whereby he agreed to build four houses on a plot of\r\nland abutting on a trunk road. Under the agreement he would become entitled to leases of the 4 houses\r\nfor a term of 99 years.', 'A J Smith Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-01-16', 'TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING'),
(6676, 'Gillette Industries Ltd v Bernstein and Others', '', '../links/cases/Gillette Industries Ltd v Bernstein and Others.pdf', 'Yes', 'Bell Broderick & Gray', '1941', 'High Court', 'Gillette Industries Ltd v Bernstein and Others In the first place this short case clears up a point arising upon a sentence in the judgment of Tomlin J in Columbia Graphophone Co Ltd v Thoms. Some had construed that statement as authority for the proposition that the relevant time for knowledge of the restrictive condition was the time of resale.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-07-25', 'INSURANCE'),
(6677, 'Gillette Industries Ltd v Bernstein and Others', '', '../links/cases/Gillette Industries Ltd v Bernstein and Others.pdf', 'Yes', 'Bell Broderick & Gray', '1941', 'High Court', 'Gillette Industries Ltd v Bernstein and Others In the first place this short case clears up a point arising upon a sentence in the judgment of Tomlin J in Columbia Graphophone Co Ltd v Thoms. Some had construed that statement as authority for the proposition that the relevant time for knowledge of the restrictive condition was the time of resale.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-07-25', 'INSURANCE'),
(6678, 'Goodchild v Wellborne', '', '../links/cases/Goodchild v Wellborne.pdf', 'Yes', 'P R Kimber., Lindus & Hortin', '1941', 'High Court', 'Goodchild v Wellborne The plaintiff was the sole director of DP Ltd a company which had been formed to take over the business of the D Club. Bridge and various kinds of poker were played at the club and revenue was also received from the running of a bar.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-03-25', 'LEISURE AND LICENSING'),
(6679, 'Goodchild v Wellborne', '', '../links/cases/Goodchild v Wellborne.pdf', 'Yes', 'P R Kimber., Lindus & Hortin', '1941', 'High Court', 'Goodchild v Wellborne The plaintiff was the sole director of DP Ltd a company which had been formed to take over the business of the D Club. Bridge and various kinds of poker were played at the club and revenue was also received from the running of a bar.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-03-25', 'LEISURE AND LICENSING'),
(6680, 'Gordon Hill Trust Ltd v Segall', '', '../links/cases/Gordon Hill Trust Ltd v Segall.pdf', 'Yes', 'Herbert Baron & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Gordon Hill Trust Ltd v Segall On 27 March 1936, the appellant contracted to purchase certain premises used as a school. Clause 6 of the contract provided as follows:', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-16', 'LAND '),
(6681, 'Gould v McAuliffe', '', '../links/cases/Gould v McAuliffe.pdf', 'Yes', 'D A Terry & Co., Oswald Hanson & Smith', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Gould v McAuliffe The plaintiff went to the public-house to meet her husband, and, while waiting for him, had occasion to look for a lavatory. She did not inquire where she could find one, but went to a garden at the side of the public-house.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-02-27', 'ANIMALS '),
(6682, 'Hall v Kingston and St Andrew Corporation', '', '../links/cases/Hall v Kingston and St Andrew Corporation.pdf', 'Yes', 'Hy S L Polak & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Hall v Kingston and St Andrew Corporation On 13 November 1934, the appellant, who was then about 7 years old, acting by her father as her next friend, sued the respondents for damages for personal injuries.', 'Hubert B Figg Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-02-10', 'COMMONWEALTH'),
(6683, 'Harris v Poland', '', '../links/cases/Harris v Poland.pdf', 'Yes', 'Cameron Kemm & Co., William Charles Crocker', '1941', 'High Court', 'Harris v Poland The plaintiff, who lived in a flat, had taken out a Lloyds comprehensive policy insuring her against “loss\r\nor damage caused by fire, burglary,â€ etc.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-01-10', 'INSURANCE'),
(6684, 'Haseldine v C A Daw & Son Ltd and Others', '', '../links/cases/Haseldine v C A Daw.pdf', 'Yes', 'Simmons & Simmons., Kenneth Brown Baker Baker', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Haseldine v C A Daw & Son Ltd and Others The plaintiff was injured in an accident caused by the breaking of the cylinder gland of a hydraulic lift in a block of flats. The flats were owned by D and the parts not in the actual occupation of the tenants were in the occupation of D.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-03-26', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6685, 'Haseldine v C A Daw & Son Ltd and Others', '', '../links/cases/Haseldine v C A Daw.pdf', 'Yes', 'Simmons & Simmons., Kenneth Brown Baker Baker', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Haseldine v C A Daw & Son Ltd and Others The plaintiff was injured in an accident caused by the breaking of the cylinder gland of a hydraulic lift in a block of flats. The flats were owned by D and the parts not in the actual occupation of the tenants were in the occupation of D.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-03-26', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6686, 'Hazel v Edwards and Another', '', '../links/cases/Hazel v Edwards and Another.pdf', 'Yes', 'Waller Neale & Houlston., H C Morris Woolsey Morris & Kennedy', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Hazel v Edwards and Another By a lease, dated 25 July 1922, the respondent demised as a whole, certain premises to the appellants for a period of 21 years from 29 September 1922, with an option for renewal. The appellants sublet the premises in three separate portions.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-06-20', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6687, 'Hazel v Edwards and Another', '', '../links/cases/Hazel v Edwards and Another.pdf', 'Yes', 'Waller Neale & Houlston., H C Morris Woolsey Morris & Kennedy', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Hazel v Edwards and Another By a lease, dated 25 July 1922, the respondent demised as a whole, certain premises to the appellants for a period of 21 years from 29 September 1922, with an option for renewal. The appellants sublet the premises in three separate portions.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-06-20', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6688, 'Heirs of Prince Mohamed Selim v Attorney-General of Palestine', '', '../links/cases/Heirs of Prince Mohamed Selim v Attorney.pdf', 'Yes', 'Bischoff Coxe & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Heirs of Prince Mohamed Selim v Attorney-General of Palestine The appellants, the heirs of Prince MS, himself one of the heirs of the late Sultan Abdul Hamid II of Turkey, sought in the Land Court of Jaffa to recover lands said to have been the private property of the Sultan, and to have the land registry of Gaza rectified by inserting their names in respect of their share of the property in place of the High Commissioner for the time being in trust for the government of Palestine, who had obtained registration under the Land (Settlement of Title) Ordinance 1928–1939.', 'Hubert B Figg Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-04-28', 'COMMONWEALTH'),
(6689, 'Heirs of Prince Mohamed Selim v Attorney-General of Palestine', '', '../links/cases/Heirs of Prince Mohamed Selim v Attorney.pdf', 'Yes', 'Bischoff Coxe & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Heirs of Prince Mohamed Selim v Attorney-General of Palestine The appellants, the heirs of Prince MS, himself one of the heirs of the late Sultan Abdul Hamid II of Turkey, sought in the Land Court of Jaffa to recover lands said to have been the private property of the Sultan, and to have the land registry of Gaza rectified by inserting their names in respect of their share of the property in place of the High Commissioner for the time being in trust for the government of Palestine, who had obtained registration under the Land (Settlement of Title) Ordinance 1928–1939.', 'Hubert B Figg Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-04-28', 'COMMONWEALTH'),
(6690, 'Hichens Harrison Woolsten & Co v Jackson & Sons', '', '../links/cases/Hichens Harrison Woolsten.pdf', 'Yes', 'Roney & Co., Hair & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Hichens Harrison Woolsten & Co v Jackson & Sons Solicitors were about to levy execution upon a judgment when they received from the defendant in the action the certificate of certain stock of the Bristol Waterworks Co, the intention being that the stock should be sold and the proceeds applied to the payment of the judgment and costs.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-03-12', 'BANKING AND FINANCE'),
(6691, 'Hichens Harrison Woolsten & Co v Jackson & Sons', '', '../links/cases/Hichens Harrison Woolsten.pdf', 'Yes', 'Roney & Co., Hair & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Hichens Harrison Woolsten & Co v Jackson & Sons Solicitors were about to levy execution upon a judgment when they received from the defendant in the action the certificate of certain stock of the Bristol Waterworks Co, the intention being that the stock should be sold and the proceeds applied to the payment of the judgment and costs.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-03-12', 'BANKING AND FINANCE'),
(6692, 'Higgs v Higgs', '', '../links/cases/Higgs v Higgs.pdf', 'Yes', 'Cartwright Cunningham & Co., P R Kimber', '1941', 'High Court', 'Higgs v Higgs A wife living under the same roof as her husband applied to justices for a maintenance order. It\r\nappeared that both the husband and the wife were earning wages.', 'D Armstead Fairweather Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '0000-00-00', 'FAMILY'),
(6693, 'Hildebrand v Lewis', '', '../links/cases/Hildebrand v Lewis.pdf', 'Yes', 'Lieberman Leigh & Co., T Vincent Howells', '1941', 'High Court', 'Hildebrand v Lewis The appellants owned premises which they let to B, who sublet part of the premises to L, on the terms, inter alia, that the rent was to be paid quarterly in advance.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-06-18', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6694, 'Howard de Walden (Lord) v Inland Revenue Commissioners', '', '../links/cases/Howard de Walden.pdf', 'Yes', 'Charles Wright', '1941', 'High Court', 'Howard de Walden (Lord) v Inland Revenue Commissioners  As a result of a series of transactions, assets belonging to the appellant and consisting of shares in and debts owing by an English company became vested in four Canadian companies.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-12-16', 'TAXATION'),
(6695, 'Humberstone Estates Ltd v Allen and Another', '', '../links/cases/Humberstone Estates Ltd v Allen and Another.pdf', 'Yes', 'Wetherfield Baines & Baines', '1941', 'High Court', 'Humberstone Estates Ltd v Allen and Another In September 1937, the landlords granted a lease of certain premises to T. In February 1940, T assigned the lease to the appellants. The rent having fallen into arrear, the landlords took proceedings and obtained judgment in respect of two quarters’ rent.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-04-29', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6696, 'In the Estate of Fawcett', '', '../links/cases/In the Estate of Fawcett.pdf', 'Yes', 'Waterhouse & Co., Langham & Letts., Herbert L Dean & Co., Bickley & Lynex', '1941', 'Appeal', 'In the Estate of Fawcett LANGTON J. This is a motion to admit to probate both or the later of two wills. The testatrix, a married woman, died on 25 October 1940, leaving no children. She left a will, dated 16 June 1931, in which she named as executors Barclays Bank and her sister Mrs Elizabeth Jane Williams.', 'D Armstead Fairweather Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-14', 'SUCCESSION'),
(6697, 'In the Estate of Fawcett', '', '../links/cases/In the Estate of Fawcett.pdf', 'Yes', 'Waterhouse & Co., Langham & Letts., Herbert L Dean & Co., Bickley & Lynex', '1941', 'Appeal', 'In the Estate of Fawcett LANGTON J. This is a motion to admit to probate both or the later of two wills. The testatrix, a married woman, died on 25 October 1940, leaving no children. She left a will, dated 16 June 1931, in which she named as executors Barclays Bank and her sister Mrs Elizabeth Jane Williams.', 'D Armstead Fairweather Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-14', 'SUCCESSION'),
(6698, 'In the Estate of Hanley', '', '../links/cases/In the Estate of Hanley.pdf', 'Yes', 'Lee Ockerby & Co., Whittome & Co., Calthrop & Leopold Harvey', '1941', 'Appeal', 'In the Estate of Hanley The testatrix died in February 1940, leaving a will by which she gave certain legacies. She appointed no executor and left no kin.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-10-20', 'SUCCESSION'),
(6699, 'In the Goods of Gibson', '', '../links/cases/In the Goods of Gibson.pdf', 'Yes', 'Coward Chance & Co., Biddle Thorne Welsford & Gait', '1941', 'Appeal', 'In the Goods of Gibson It is said that the rule under which a soldier’s will not in the statutory form may be admitted to probate is derived from the Roman law. The basis of the rule in that law was that the soldier was in expeditione and that he was inops consilii.', 'Hubert B Figg Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-02-17', 'SUCCESSION'),
(6700, 'Income Tax Commissioner, Bihar and Orissa v Maharajadhiraj Sir Rameshwar Singh of Darbhanga', '', '../links/cases/Income Tax Commissioner.pdf', 'Yes', 'Hy S L Polak & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Income Tax Commissioner, Bihar and Orissa v Maharajadhiraj Sir Rameshwar Singh of Darbhanga The respondent’s father made a loan of 10 lakhs of rupees to a company in which he was a shareholder, and recovered this loan in an action, the costs of which were allowed as an expense incurred in his moneylending business in the assessment of his income tax.', 'Hubert B Figg Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-12-12', 'COMMONWEALTH'),
(6701, 'Inland Revenue Commissioners v F A Clark & Son Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Inland Revenue Commissioners v F A Clark.pdf', 'Yes', 'Richard Furber & Son', '1941', 'High Court', 'Inland Revenue Commissioners v F A Clark & Son Ltd In the second case, the appellant company held shares in eleven companies operating outside the United Kingdom, which were, therefore, not liable to be assessed to the national defence contribution. In the case of 4 of these companies, the appellant company itself controlled more than 50 per cent, of the votes.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-04-08', 'TAXATION'),
(6702, 'Inland Revenue Commissioners v F A Clark & Son Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Inland Revenue Commissioners v F A Clark.pdf', 'Yes', 'Richard Furber & Son', '1941', 'High Court', 'Inland Revenue Commissioners v F A Clark & Son Ltd In the second case, the appellant company held shares in eleven companies operating outside the United Kingdom, which were, therefore, not liable to be assessed to the national defence contribution. In the case of 4 of these companies, the appellant company itself controlled more than 50 per cent, of the votes.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-04-08', 'TAXATION'),
(6703, 'Inland Revenue Commissioners v Gaunt', '', '../links/cases/Inland Revenue Commissioners v Gaunt.pdf', 'Yes', 'Ashurst Morris Crisp & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Inland Revenue Commissioners v Gaunt By a settlement dated 10 March 1938, the respondent assigned £100 to trustees and directed them to purchase certain shares.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-04-08', 'TAXATION'),
(6704, 'Inland Revenue Commissioners v Lord Glenconner', '', '../links/cases/Inland Revenue Commissioners v Lord Glenconner.pdf', 'Yes', 'Hughes Narborough & Thomas.,', '1941', 'High Court', 'Inland Revenue Commissioners v Lord Glenconner G, whose marriage had been dissolved, covenanted, in consideration of his wife making no application to the court for maintenance, to pay his wife during their joint lives an annuity of £1,000 per annum, and a further £750 per annum in respect of each of his two sons to be applied for the maintenance and education of such son.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-07-17', 'TAXATION'),
(6705, 'International Railway Co v Niagara Parks Commission', '', '../links/cases/International Railway Co v Niagara Parks Commission.pdf', 'Yes', 'Blake & Redden., Lawrence Jones & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'International Railway Co v Niagara Parks Commission The appellants claimed interest on the amount of compensation representing the value of their railway taken over by the respondents, such interest being claimed from the date when the respondents took possession of the railway until the date of payment of the amount of the award by a board of arbitrators.', 'Hubert B Figg Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-04-28', 'COMMONWEALTH'),
(6706, 'John Barker & Co Ltd v Littman', '', '../links/cases/John Barker.pdf', 'Yes', 'Baileys Shaw & Gillett., Wigram & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'John Barker & Co Ltd v Littman The defendant having failed to complete an agreement to purchase certain freehold property, the plaintiffs obtained judgment in an action for specific performance.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-04-04', 'ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE'),
(6707, 'John Fowler & Co (Leeds) Ltd v Duncan and Crabtree', '', '../links/cases/John Fowler.pdf', 'Yes', 'Maxwell Batley & Co., Simpson Curtis & Burrill', '1941', 'High Court', 'John Fowler & Co (Leeds) Ltd v Duncan and Crabtree The plaintiff company carried on two forms of manufacture, for each of which they had a separate account with the bank. One of these forms of manufacture was almost wholly connected with the war.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-06-17', 'COMPANY'),
(6708, 'Joseph Constantine Stecoamship Line Ltd v Imperial Smelting Corporation Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Joseph Constantine Steamship Line Ltd v Imperial Smelting Corporation Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Holman Fenwick & Willan., Parker Garrett & Co', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Joseph Constantine Steamship Line Ltd v Imperial Smelting Corporation Ltd A ship was chartered to load a cargo, but, on the day before she should have proceeded to her berth, an explosion occurred in the auxiliary boiler, which made it impossible for her to undertake the voyage.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-09', 'CONTRACT'),
(6709, 'Joseph Constantine Stecoamship Line Ltd v Imperial Smelting Corporation Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Joseph Constantine Steamship Line Ltd v Imperial Smelting Corporation Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Holman Fenwick & Willan., Parker Garrett & Co', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Joseph Constantine Steamship Line Ltd v Imperial Smelting Corporation Ltd A ship was chartered to load a cargo, but, on the day before she should have proceeded to her berth, an explosion occurred in the auxiliary boiler, which made it impossible for her to undertake the voyage.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-09', 'CONTRACT'),
(6710, '', '', '', 'Yes', '', '1941', 'Supreme', '', '', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-27', ''),
(6711, 'King Features Syndicate Inc v O and M Kleemann Ltd', '', '../links/cases/King Features Syndicate Inc v O and M Kleemann Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Shaen Roscoe & Co., Derick R Martin & Co', '1941', 'Appeal', 'King Features Syndicate Inc v O and M Kleemann Ltd S was the author of a large number of drawings or cartoons depicting as the central figure a grotesque and fictitious character known as “Popeyeâ€ or “Popeye the Sailor,â€ and it was admitted that, if there was copyright in these drawings or cartoons, which were published from 1929 onwards in the United States of America and simultaneously in Canada, it was vested in the plaintiffs or one of them.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-27', 'INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY'),
(6712, 'King Features Syndicate Inc v O and M Kleemann Ltd', '', '../links/cases/King Features Syndicate Inc v O and M Kleemann Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Shaen Roscoe & Co., Derick R Martin & Co', '1941', 'Appeal', 'King Features Syndicate Inc v O and M Kleemann Ltd S was the author of a large number of drawings or cartoons depicting as the central figure a grotesque and fictitious character known as “Popeyeâ€ or “Popeye the Sailor,â€ and it was admitted that, if there was copyright in these drawings or cartoons, which were published from 1929 onwards in the United States of America and simultaneously in Canada, it was vested in the plaintiffs or one of them.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-27', 'INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY'),
(6713, 'King v King', '', '../links/cases/King v King.pdf', 'Yes', 'Peake & Co., Ratcliffe Son & Henderson., A W H Harvey & Son', '1941', 'Appeal', 'King v King Before the marriage which was here sought to be dissolved on the ground of desertion, the wife was engaged in trade, and residence in a certain house was essential to the continuance of the wife’s business.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-04-01', 'FAMILY'),
(6714, 'Lancaster Motor Co (London)', '', '../links/cases/Lancaster Motor Co.pdf', 'Yes', 'J E Baring & Co., J Hampson Fogg', '1941', 'Commercial Cour', 'Lancaster Motor Co (London) The Court of Appeal has here rejected the argument that a liquidator is so closely associated with the company that an account at a bank standing in his name is, for the purposes of garnishee proceedings, in the same position as one standing in the name of the company.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-04-01', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6715, 'Latilla v Inland Revenue Commissioners', '', '../links/cases/Latilla v Inland Revenue Commissioners.pdf', 'Yes', 'Birkbeck Julius Edwards & Co.,', '1941', 'High Court', 'Latilla v Inland Revenue Commissioners The appellant’s wife was one of five partners in a gold mine situated in Rhodesia. On the return to England in 1933 of Mrs J, only one of the partners, M continued to reside in Rhodesia.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-04-29', 'TAXATION'),
(6716, 'Laurie v Raglan Building Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Laurie v Raglan Building Co Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Vizard Oldham Crowder & Cash., R I Lewis & Co', '1941', 'Supreme', 'Laurie v Raglan Building Co Ltd In daylight, on a broad and good road, the defendants’ lorry, heavily laden with wood, was being driven at a pace of 10 mph to 12 mph. The road was in a dangerous condition at the time, as there had been a fall of snow which had frozen.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-10-24', 'TORTS'),
(6717, 'Leicestershire County Council v Michael Faraday & Partners Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Leicestershire County Council v Michael Faraday.pdf', 'Yes', 'Kingsford Dorman & Co., Sadler & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Leicestershire County Council v Michael Faraday & Partners LtdThe appellant council employed the respondent company to value and report upon properties in the council’s area in accordance with the provisions of the Rating and Valuation Act 1925, s 38.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-22', 'LOCAL GOVERNMENT'),
(6718, 'Liversidge v Anderson and Another', '', '../links/cases/Liversidge v Anderson and Another.pdf', 'Yes', 'Buckeridge & Braune', '1941', 'High Court', 'Liversidge v Anderson and Another The appellant, who had been detained in prison under the Defence (General) Regulations, reg 18B, which provided for the detention of persons of hostile associations, claimed a declaration that his detention was unlawful and damages for false imprisonment.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-11-03', 'CONSTITUTIONAl'),
(6719, 'London Armoury Co Ltd v Ever Ready Co (Great Britain) Ltd', '', '../links/cases/London Armoury Co Ltd v Ever Ready Co.pdf', 'Yes', 'Bentleys Stokes & Lowless', '1941', 'High Court', 'London Armoury Co Ltd v Ever Ready Co (Great Britain) Ltd The plaintiffs were importers of electric torch batteries for sale in the United Kingdom. The defendants\r\nwere both manufacturers in the United Kingdom and also importers into the United Kingdom of electric\r\ntorch batteries.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-02-27', 'INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY'),
(6720, 'London Co-Operative Society Ltd v Southern Essex Assessment Committee', '', '../links/cases/London Co.pdf', 'Yes', 'Fletcher Liddle & Co., Blundell Baker & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'London Co-Operative Society Ltd v Southern Essex Assessment Committee A laundry, which was an industrial hereditament within the meaning of the Rating and Valuation (Apportionment) Act 1928, used a part of its premises as a canteen.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-07-22', 'LOCAL GOVERNMENT');
INSERT INTO `courtrulings` (`id`, `title`, `content`, `link`, `isshow`, `author`, `date`, `courttype`, `summary`, `presiding`, `casetype`, `subjectmatter`, `caseno`, `counsel1`, `counsel2`, `courtname`, `caseDate`, `subjectmattertitle`) VALUES
(6721, 'London Co-Operative Society Ltd v Southern Essex Assessment Committee', '', '../links/cases/London Co.pdf', 'Yes', 'Fletcher Liddle & Co., Blundell Baker & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'London Co-Operative Society Ltd v Southern Essex Assessment Committee A laundry, which was an industrial hereditament within the meaning of the Rating and Valuation (Apportionment) Act 1928, used a part of its premises as a canteen.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-07-22', 'LOCAL GOVERNMENT'),
(6722, 'Lory v Great Western Railway Co', '', '../links/cases/Lory v Great Western Railway Co.pdf', 'Yes', 'Hancock & Willis., P W Pine', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Lory v Great Western Railway Co The plaintiff claimed damages in respect of the death of her husband for herself and her two children (aged 5 years and 2 years respectively) under the Fatal Accidents Act 1846, and under the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1934.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-11-20', 'PENSIONS'),
(6723, 'Manley Estates Ltd v Benedek', '', '../links/cases/Manley Estates Ltd v Benedek.pdf', 'Yes', 'Oscar Mason & Co., Isadore Goldman & Son', '1942', 'High Court', 'Manley Estates Ltd v Benedek It was argued in this case that the leave to defend was conditional upon payment being made within 7\r\ndays, and that, when the payment was not made within that time, the action had come to an end,\r\nbecause the condition upon which the defendant was allowed to continue it had not been fulfilled.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-01-27', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6724, 'Manley Estates Ltd v Benedek', '', '../links/cases/Manley Estates Ltd v Benedek.pdf', 'Yes', 'Oscar Mason & Co., Isadore Goldman & Son', '1942', 'High Court', 'Manley Estates Ltd v Benedek It was argued in this case that the leave to defend was conditional upon payment being made within 7\r\ndays, and that, when the payment was not made within that time, the action had come to an end,\r\nbecause the condition upon which the defendant was allowed to continue it had not been fulfilled.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-01-27', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6725, 'Mason v Warlow', '', '../links/cases/Mason v Warlow.pdf', 'Yes', 'Allen & Overy,H Vaughan Vaughan & Co., Lumley & Lumley,', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Mason v Warlow The appellant was the successor in title of JM, who let to the respondent a cottage and shed at a rent of 6s per week by an agreement in writing dated 30 March 1921.', 'W J Alderman Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-03-19', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6726, 'Meikle and Others v Maufe and Others', '', '../links/cases/Meikle and Others v Maufe and Others.pdf', 'Yes', 'Lee & Pembertons., Sydney Redfern & Co', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Meikle and Others v Maufe and Others In 1912 the defendants, H & Son Ltd, employed a firm of architects in connection with buildings which were erected shortly afterwards. The contract with the architects contained no special terms as to ownership of the copyright in the plans or buildings, and, the plans and design being their original work, the copyright became vested in them.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-07-31', 'INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY'),
(6727, 'Miller v Liverpool Co-Operative Society Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Miller v Liverpool Co.pdf', 'Yes', 'Richards Butler & Co., Thomas Cooper & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Miller v Liverpool Co-Operative Society Ltd In a contract of sale cif, which contained a common form appropriation clause, a further clause was\r\ninserted providing that all notices had to be sent to the buyers’ agents in a certain place, and that\r\ndocuments also had to be sent there for payment.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-03-07', 'TORTS'),
(6728, 'Milligan v Milligan', '', '../links/cases/Milligan v Milligan.pdf', 'Yes', 'Turner & Evans', '1941', 'High Court', 'Milligan v Milligan The respondent, a senior Army officer, lived with the petitioner at various addresses in England in hotels and furnished houses, but he was not domiciled in England. On obtaining promotion and an appointment, he went to live in an officers’ mess.', 'D Armstead Fairweather Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-04-09', 'FAMILY'),
(6729, 'Monckton v Monckton', '', '../links/cases/Monckton v Monckton.pdf', 'Yes', 'Zeffertt Heard & Morley Lawson', '1941', 'High Court', 'Monckton v Monckton In December 1937, a wife quarrelled with her husband and asked him to leave her, which he did. The husband had given her no cause to act as she did, and this, therefore, constituted desertion by the wife. Subsequent letters proved that she was still of the same mind down to 1939.', 'D Armstead Fairweather Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-07-31', 'FAMILY'),
(6730, 'Mouser v Major', '', '../links/cases/Mouser v Major.pdf', 'Yes', 'Bristows Cooke & Carpmael', '1941', 'High Court', 'Mouser v Major It was argued in this case that, upon the death of the statutory tenant, there must be a lapse of time\r\nbefore there is a new tenant of the property, and that during this period the landlord must in law be in\r\npossession of the property.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-01-17', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT'),
(6731, 'Nelson v Adamson', '', '../links/cases/Nelson v Adamson.pdf', 'Yes', 'Waterhouse & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Nelson v Adamson By his will an Australian appointed three Australians as his executors and trustees, and left the residue of his estate in trust for his grand-daughter, the appellant, for life, subject to the payment thereout of an annuity and of the expenses of administration.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-04-08', 'TAXATION'),
(6732, 'Newell v Gillingham Corporation', '', '../links/cases/Newell v Gillingham Corporation.pdf', 'Yes', 'Arnold Carter & Co., Sharpe Pritchard & Co., Robert Booth, Town Clerk, Gillingham', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Newell v Gillingham Corporation The plaintiff, an infant, was bound by a deed of apprenticeship to serve the defendants for a period of 5 years expiring on 9 March 1941. This deed contained a clause enabling the corporation to dismiss the plaintiff “if he should be wilfully disobedient or … slothful or negligent or otherwise grossly misbehave himself.â€', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-04-01', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6733, 'Norwich Rating Authority v Norwich Assessment Committee and Fountain', '', '../links/cases/Norwich Rating Authority v Norwich Assessment Committee and Fountain.pdf', 'Yes', 'Sharpe Prichard & Co., Vizard Oldham Crowder & Cash,Holme & Ward', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Norwich Rating Authority v Norwich Assessment Committee and Fountain In 1939, a rating authority made a proposal for the amendment of the valuation list in respect of the assessment of a tied public house in order to make that assessment conform with the decision of the House of Lords in the Robinson case.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-07-18', 'LOCAL GOVERNMENT'),
(6734, 'Pease and Partners Ltd v Birch', '', '../links/cases/Pease and Partners Ltd v Birch.pdf', 'Yes', 'Weatherall, Sturt & Hardy.,Corbin, Greener & Cook.,Raley & Sons', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Pease and Partners Ltd v Birch A workman some years before 1928 had suffered from miner’s nystagmus. In 1928 he was employed by\r\nthe appellants and then signed a declaration that he had not suffered from that disease. There was a\r\nbreak in his employment, but, in 1933, when he was re-engaged by the appellants, he again signed a\r\ndeclaration that he had not suffered from the disease.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-02-24', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6735, 'Pinson v Lloyds & National Provincial Foreign Bank Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Pinson v Lloyds.pdf', 'Yes', 'C Grobel Son & Co., Linklaters & Paines', '1941', 'High Court', 'Pinson v Lloyds & National Provincial Foreign Bank Ltd The plaintiff sued the defendants alleging negligence in the purchase and sale of certain securities. The defendants by their defence, so far as material for the purposes of this case, denied that they had effected purchases or sales without having been authorised by the plaintiff to do so.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-05-09', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6736, 'Plomien Fuel Economiser Co Ltd v National Marketing Co', '', '../links/cases/Plomien Fuel Economiser Co Ltd v National Marketing Co.pdf', 'Yes', 'Simon, Haynes, Barlas & Ireland,Rowley, Ashworth & Co', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Plomien Fuel Economiser Co Ltd v National Marketing Co In an action for breach of express or implied terms of a contract and for passing off, the plaintiffs desired\r\nto put in evidence a proof of evidence taken from a man who had been employed by them in their fuel\r\neconomiser business as a tester, and who was dead at the time of the action.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-02-05', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6737, 'Plomien Fuel Economiser Co Ltd v National Marketing Co', '', '../links/cases/Plomien Fuel Economiser Co Ltd v National Marketing Co.pdf', 'Yes', 'Simon, Haynes, Barlas & Ireland,Rowley, Ashworth & Co', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Plomien Fuel Economiser Co Ltd v National Marketing Co In an action for breach of express or implied terms of a contract and for passing off, the plaintiffs desired\r\nto put in evidence a proof of evidence taken from a man who had been employed by them in their fuel\r\neconomiser business as a tester, and who was dead at the time of the action.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-02-05', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6738, 'Portman v Roskill & Sons', '', '../links/cases/Portman v Roskill.pdf', 'Yes', 'Ashurst Morris Crisp & Co., Wilde Sapte & Co', '1941', 'High Court', 'Portman v Roskill & Sons Applications for leave to transfer proceedings from the county court to the Chancery Division should be\r\nby originating summons before the master, who can, if necessary, adjourn the matter into court. They\r\ncannot be made ex parte as that practice is not suitable to the Chancery Division.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-01-17', 'ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE'),
(6739, 'Proctor v Peebles (Papermakers) Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Proctor v Peebles.pdf', 'Yes', 'Robinson & Bradley,Oddie & Roebuck, Blackburn,L Bingham & Co,', '1941', 'Appeal', 'Proctor v Peebles (Papermakers) Ltd This is merely a practice note. It is right that every proper course should be taken to curtail the expense of litigation, and one of the methods adopted for the saving of expense has been the adoption of an agreed medical report.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1941-03-14', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6740, 'Beak (HM Inspector of Taxes) v Robson', '', '../links/cases/Beak.pdf', 'Yes', 'Solicitor to Inland Revenue., Hyde Mahon & Pascal', '1942', 'High Court', 'Beak (HM Inspector of Taxes) v Robson The respondent, on 4 October 1937, entered into an agreement with a company in whose employment he had been for some time, whereby he was to be employed for a term of 5 years as director and manager, at a salary there stated.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-05-07', 'TAXATION'),
(6741, 'Borman and Others v London & North Eastern Railway Co', '', '../links/cases/Borman and Others v London.pdf', 'Yes', 'Pattinson & Brewer., W H Hanscombe', '1942', 'High Court', 'Borman and Others v London & North Eastern Railway Co The applicants were originally employed on a railway which became part of the respondent company’s undertaking through the operation of the Railways Act 1921. They were dismissed from the service of the respondent company in 1938, in order to effect a reduction in expenses, and it was found as a fact that the old company would have been affected by a similar necessity even if the amalgamation had not taken place.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-05-08', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6742, 'Century Insurance Co Ltd v Northern Ireland Road Transport Board', '', '../links/cases/Century Insurance Co Ltd v Northern Ireland Road Transport Board.pdf', 'Yes', 'Berrymans., Blyth Dutton Hartley & Blyth', '1942', 'High Court', 'Century Insurance Co Ltd v Northern Ireland Road Transport Board A lorry belonging to the respondents and driven by one of their employees, was delivering petrol in bulk from the Larne depot of H & Co to a garage in Belfast. While the petrol was flowing from the lorry to the tank at the garage, the driver lit a cigarette and threw away the lighted match. A fire was caused forthwith, and an explosion, which effected considerable damage, resulted. It was admitted that the act of the lorry driver was negligent.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-02-04', 'EMPLOYMENT'),
(6743, 'Coca-Cola Company of Canada Limited v Pepsi-Cola Company of Canada Limited', '', '../links/cases/Coca.pdf', 'Yes', 'Warren Murton Foster & Swan., Parker Garrett & Co', '1942', 'High Court', 'Coca-Cola Company of Canada Limited v Pepsi-Cola Company of Canada Limited The appellants were owners of a trademark consisting of the words “Cocaâ€ and “Colaâ€ joined by a hyphen and written in script form with flourishes. The mark was applied to non-alcoholic beverages and syrups and was used for that purpose in Canada.', 'Hubert B Figg Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-03-19', 'COMMONWEALTH'),
(6744, 'Coppin and Others v Bush', '', '../links/cases/Coppin and Others v Bush.pdf', 'Yes', 'Elwell & Binjord Hole., The Treasury Solicitor', '1942', 'High Court', 'Coppin and Others v Bush The defendant, an Army driver, collided with the plaintiff’s car in April 1939. The plaintiff, in October 1939, issued a writ against him, but was unable to serve it since the defendant’s exact whereabouts were unknown.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-03-23', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6745, 'Davies and Another v Powell Duffryn Associated Collieries Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Davies and Another v Powell Duffryn Associated Collieries Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'Russell Jones & Co., William A Crump & Son', '1942', 'High Court', 'Davies and Another v Powell Duffryn Associated Collieries Ltd The husbands of the appellants were fatally injured by an explosion in a coal mine belonging to the respondents. The appellants, each of them suing as administratrix of her deceased husband, brought actions against the respondents for breach of statutory duty and negligence.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-01-27', 'ENVIRONMENTAL'),
(6746, 'Dawson v Murex Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Dawson v Murex Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'E P Rugg., Rowley Ashworth & Co', '1942', 'High Court', 'Dawson v Murex Ltd The appellants, for the purpose of loading a furnace for the refining of raw blister copper, used trays which were hoisted and conveyed from one part of the factory to another by a sling of 4 chains attached to the tray by a hook passing through an eye in a lug at each of the 4 corners of the tray.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-02-23', 'HEALTH'),
(6747, 'Duncan v Cammell Laird & Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Duncan v Cammell Laird.pdf', 'Yes', 'Evill & Coleman., Carpenters', '1942', 'High Court', 'Duncan v Cammell Laird & Co Ltd The appellants asked for an order for the production of certain documents. The First Lord of the Admiralty had made an affidavit in which he stated that such production would be contrary to the public interest.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-03-27', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6748, 'Earl Fitzwilliam’s Collieries Co v Phillips', '', '../links/cases/Earl Fitzwilliam.pdf', 'Yes', 'Andrew Purves Sutton & Creery., Solicitor of Inland Revenue', '1942', 'High Court', 'Earl Fitzwilliam’s Collieries Co v Phillips A colliery company, under a mining lease, contracted to pay to a lessor sums of £10 and £5 per acre of so much of the coal demised as should have been worked and gotten during the preceding half year as liquidated damages in respect of the over-lying surface.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-04-17', 'ENVIRONMENTAL'),
(6749, 'Egham & Staines Electricity Co Ltd v Egham Urban District Council', '', '../links/cases/Egham.pdf', 'Yes', 'Torr & Co., Burton Yeates & Hart', '1942', 'Supreme', 'Egham & Staines Electricity Co Ltd v Egham Urban District Council Under three contracts the plaintiffs agreed to supply electricity to the defendants for street lighting purposes and to undertake various duties in connection with the maintenance of the street lighting system.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-02-25', 'CONTRACT'),
(6750, 'Egham & Staines Electricity Co Ltd v Egham Urban District Council', '', '../links/cases/Egham.pdf', 'Yes', 'Torr & Co., Burton Yeates & Hart', '1942', 'Supreme', 'Egham & Staines Electricity Co Ltd v Egham Urban District Council Under three contracts the plaintiffs agreed to supply electricity to the defendants for street lighting purposes and to undertake various duties in connection with the maintenance of the street lighting system.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-02-25', 'CONTRACT'),
(6751, 'Fattorini Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners', '', '../links/cases/Fattorini Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners.pdf', 'Yes', 'Biddle Thorne Welsford & Barnes., Solicitor of Inland Revenue', '1942', 'Supreme', 'Fattorini Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners A holding company owned a part of the shares of 3 operative companies —ie, companies which actually carried on the trading with which they were all concerned. In 1936, the holding company purchased all the remaining shares in the 3 operative companies. In order to provide the purchase money, the holding company charged all the shares to the bank, and covenanted to pay to the bank all dividends received in respect of the shares so charged.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-04-27', 'COMPANY'),
(6752, 'Gifford v Whittaker', '', '../links/cases/Gifford v Whittaker.pdf', 'Yes', 'L Mulcahy, Gateshead.,  Molineaux McKeag & Cooper', '1942', 'High Court', 'Gifford v Whittaker The respondent was the driver of a lorry which belonged to his employers, and which they had hired to a brewery company. The lorry was in charge of an employee of the brewery who, with the assistance of two fellow-employees, had loaded it.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-03-17', 'CRIMINAL LAW '),
(6753, 'Guardian Trust and Executors Co of New Zealand Ltd v Public Trustee of New Zealand', '', '../links/cases/Guardian Trust and Executors Co of New Zealand Ltd v Public Trustee of New Zealand.pdf', 'Yes', 'Stafford Clark & Co., Mackrell Maton Godlee & Quincey', '1942', 'Supreme', 'Guardian Trust and Executors Co of New Zealand Ltd v Public Trustee of New Zealand In July 1935, the appellants obtained probate of a will which named them as executors. The next-of-kin instituted proceedings for the revocation of probate on the ground of the want of testamentary capacity of the testatrix, and in December 1936, the court ordered probate to be recalled.', 'Hubert B Figg Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-01-19', 'COMMONWEALTH'),
(6754, 'Henriksen (HM Inspector of Taxes) v Grafton Hotel Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Henriksen.pdf', 'Yes', 'Bower Cotton & Bower., Solicitor of Inland Revenue', '1942', 'High Court', 'Henriksen (HM Inspector of Taxes) v Grafton Hotel Ltd In arriving at their income tax assessments, the appellants claimed to deduct instalments of monopoly value paid in respect of licensed premises of which they were the tenants.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-05-13', 'LEISURE AND LICENSING'),
(6755, 'Herman Jennings & Co Ltd v Slatcher', '', '../links/cases/Herman Jennings.pdf', 'Yes', 'Hyman Stone & Co., Church Adams Tatham & Co', '1942', 'High Court', 'Herman Jennings & Co Ltd v Slatcher The appellants, who were wholesalers, sold a large quantity of packets of egg substitute to a distributing firm, who sold a part of them to a retailer. The invoice given by the appellants in respect of these goods contained a warranty that they complied with all statutory requirements.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-05-01', 'CONSUMER'),
(6756, 'Humphreys v Tyler', '', '../links/cases/Humphreys v Tyler.pdf', 'Yes', 'Maples Teesdale & Co', '1942', 'Supreme', 'Humphreys v Tyler A billeting notice under the Defence (General) Regulations, reg 22, was prepared by the billeting officer and handed to the respondent by a police constable in the presence of the billeting officer.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-05-26', 'CONSTITUTIONAL'),
(6757, 'In the Estate of O’Connor deceased', '', '../links/cases/In the Estate of O.pdf', 'Yes', 'Ranger Burton & Frost., Treasury Solicitor.', '1942', 'High Court', 'In the Estate of O’Connor deceased Two spinster sisters, who lived together and had no surviving relatives, executed on 19 April 1933, a joint will beginning as follows: “We … who intend at a later date making each our separate will in favour of the other, are now leaving this document … In the event of our death together, by accident or other cause, or, if one of us should survive the other and be incapable by illness or should die without making any later will, we … wish … that this will should stand.â€', 'D Armstead Fairweather Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-03-13', 'SUCCESSION'),
(6758, 'Lane v Minister of War Transport', '', '../links/cases/Lane v Minister of War Transport.pdf', 'Yes', 'Mawby Barrie & Letts., Treasury Solicitor', '1942', 'High Court', 'Lane v Minister of War Transport The county council, acting on behalf of the defendant, had contracted orally to hire the plaintiff’s lorry for haulage, and one of the terms of a written order confirming the agreement stated that “the county council reserves the right to terminate your employment under this haulage order at any time.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-03-16', 'CONSTITUTIONAL'),
(6759, 'Middlesex County Council v Kiverstein', '', '../links/cases/Middlesex County Council v Kiverstein.pdf', 'Yes', 'Spiro & Steele., C W Radcliffe', '1942', 'High Court', 'Middlesex County Council v Kiverstein A woman was admitted to a hospital maintained by the county council and remained there as a patient until her death. Under the Public Health Act 1936, s 184(1), a county council is under a duty to recover from a patient or his estate expenses of maintenance in hospital, “not being expenses recoverable from any other source.â€', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-04-02', 'HEALTH'),
(6760, 'Middlesex County Council v Kiverstein', '', '../links/cases/Middlesex County Council v Kiverstein.pdf', 'Yes', 'Spiro & Steele., C W Radcliffe', '1942', 'High Court', 'Middlesex County Council v Kiverstein A woman was admitted to a hospital maintained by the county council and remained there as a patient until her death. Under the Public Health Act 1936, s 184(1), a county council is under a duty to recover from a patient or his estate expenses of maintenance in hospital, “not being expenses recoverable from any other source.â€', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-04-02', 'HEALTH'),
(6761, 'Morgan v Aylen', '', '../links/cases/Morgan v Aylen.pdf', 'Yes', 'Elwell & Binford Hole., Copley Singleton & Billson., Howe Browne', '1942', 'Appeal', 'Morgan v Aylen The plaintiff was escorting a child of 3½ years back to his home. She had done this on a number of previous occasions, and, when they approached the place where they were accustomed to cross a certain road, which was near the junction of that road with two other roads, the child, who was a little way ahead of the plaintiff, began to cross the road by himself.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-02-28', 'TORTS'),
(6762, 'Morgan v Aylen', '', '../links/cases/Morgan v Aylen.pdf', 'Yes', 'Elwell & Binford Hole., Copley Singleton & Billson., Howe Browne', '1942', 'Appeal', 'Morgan v Aylen The plaintiff was escorting a child of 3½ years back to his home. She had done this on a number of previous occasions, and, when they approached the place where they were accustomed to cross a certain road, which was near the junction of that road with two other roads, the child, who was a little way ahead of the plaintiff, began to cross the road by himself.', 'D K Belcher Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-02-28', 'TORTS'),
(6763, 'Mummery v Mummery', '', '../links/cases/Mummery v Mummery.pdf', 'Yes', 'Kenneth Brown Baker Baker', '1942', 'High Court', 'Mummery v Mummery An act of intercourse between the parties raises a presumption of condonation of a previous matrimonial offence, but it is here shown that it is not an irrebuttable presumption.', 'D Armstead Fairweather Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-03-18', 'FAMILY'),
(6764, 'Mummery v Mummery', '', '../links/cases/Mummery v Mummery.pdf', 'Yes', 'Kenneth Brown Baker Baker', '1942', 'High Court', 'Mummery v Mummery An act of intercourse between the parties raises a presumption of condonation of a previous matrimonial offence, but it is here shown that it is not an irrebuttable presumption.', 'D Armstead Fairweather Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-03-18', 'FAMILY'),
(6765, 'Osborne v Steel Barrel Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Osborne v Steel Barrel Co Ltd.pdf', 'Yes', 'A P Browne & Co', '1942', 'High Court', 'Osborne v Steel Barrel Co Ltd HB purchased the assets of a company from the receiver for the debenture-holders of that company. At that time the appellant company was not in existence. He later assigned to the appellant company the benefit of his contract.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-04-27', 'COMPANY'),
(6766, 'R v General Medical Council, Ex parte Spackman', '', '../links/cases/R v General Medical Council.pdf', 'Yes', 'Waterhouse & Co., Hempsons', '1942', 'Supreme', 'R v General Medical Council, Ex parte Spackman On the hearing of a petition for divorce S was found to have committed adultery with a married woman. The General Medical Council found that he stood in professional relationship to her at all material times and adjudged him to have been guilty of infamous conduct in a professional respect.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-03-30', 'MEDICINE'),
(6767, 'R v General Medical Council, Ex parte Spackman', '', '../links/cases/R v General Medical Council.pdf', 'Yes', 'Waterhouse & Co., Hempsons', '1942', 'Supreme', 'R v General Medical Council, Ex parte Spackman On the hearing of a petition for divorce S was found to have committed adultery with a married woman. The General Medical Council found that he stood in professional relationship to her at all material times and adjudged him to have been guilty of infamous conduct in a professional respect.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-03-30', 'MEDICINE'),
(6768, 'R v Keeling', '', '../links/cases/R v Keeling.pdf', 'Yes', 'Kimbers Williams Sweetland & Stinson., Ernest A Kite', '1942', 'Appeal', 'R v Keeling The appellant was convicted on a charge of having unlawful carnal knowledge of a girl aged 8 years. On account of her age the girl was not sworn as a witness, and, by reason of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933, s 38(1), it became essential as a matter of law that her evidence should be corroborated.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-03-10', 'CRIMINAL LAW '),
(6769, 'R v Keeling', '', '../links/cases/R v Keeling.pdf', 'Yes', 'Kimbers Williams Sweetland & Stinson., Ernest A Kite', '1942', 'Appeal', 'R v Keeling The appellant was convicted on a charge of having unlawful carnal knowledge of a girl aged 8 years. On account of her age the girl was not sworn as a witness, and, by reason of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933, s 38(1), it became essential as a matter of law that her evidence should be corroborated.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-03-10', 'CRIMINAL LAW '),
(6770, 'R v Minister of Health, Ex parte Staffordshire Mental Hospitals Board', '', '../links/cases/R v Minister of Health.pdf', 'Yes', 'Sharpe Pritchard & Co., Bremner Sons & Corlett., Turner & Co', '1942', 'Appeal', 'R v Minister of Health, Ex parte Staffordshire Mental Hospitals Board A was for many years employed by the Staffordshire Mental Hospitals Board. When he left the service of the Board he claimed a superannuation allowance under the Asylums Officers’ Superannuation Act 1909.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-03-27', 'ADMINISTRATIVE'),
(6771, 'R v Minister of Health, Ex parte Staffordshire Mental Hospitals Board', '', '../links/cases/R v Minister of Health.pdf', 'Yes', 'Sharpe Pritchard & Co., Bremner Sons & Corlett., Turner & Co', '1942', 'Appeal', 'R v Minister of Health, Ex parte Staffordshire Mental Hospitals Board A was for many years employed by the Staffordshire Mental Hospitals Board. When he left the service of the Board he claimed a superannuation allowance under the Asylums Officers’ Superannuation Act 1909.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-03-27', 'ADMINISTRATIVE'),
(6772, 'Racecourse Betting Control Board v Brighton County Borough Rating Authority', '', '../links/cases/Racecourse Betting Control Board v Brighton County Borough Rating Authority.pdf', 'Yes', 'Samuel Coleman', '1942', 'Supreme', 'Racecourse Betting Control Board v Brighton County Borough Rating Authority This appeal from a decision of Wrottesley J, dated 18 June 1941, and reported [1941] 2 All ER 595, was dismissed by consent. MacKinnon LJ stated that, having regard to the way in which the case stated was drawn, it raised no question of law for the consideration of the court.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-04-16', 'LEISURE AND LICENSING'),
(6773, 'Racecourse Betting Control Board v Brighton County Borough Rating Authority', '', '../links/cases/Racecourse Betting Control Board v Brighton County Borough Rating Authority.pdf', 'Yes', 'Samuel Coleman', '1942', 'Supreme', 'Racecourse Betting Control Board v Brighton County Borough Rating Authority This appeal from a decision of Wrottesley J, dated 18 June 1941, and reported [1941] 2 All ER 595, was dismissed by consent. MacKinnon LJ stated that, having regard to the way in which the case stated was drawn, it raised no question of law for the consideration of the court.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-04-16', 'LEISURE AND LICENSING'),
(6774, 'Re A Contract between The Corporation of Watford and Ware', '', '../links/cases/Re A Contract between The Corporation of Watford and Ware.pdf', 'Yes', 'Shaen, Roscoe & Co,A N Schofield, Town Clerk, Watford', '1942', 'Appeal', 'Re A Contract between The Corporation of Watford and Warev A contract of sale of freehold property made in 1927 provided that the purchaser should pay £50 deposit and pay the balance of the purchase money, together with interest thereon at 5½ per cent per annum, by 25 equal annual instalments of £50 5s 10d.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-12-18', 'LAND '),
(6775, 'Re A Contract between The Corporation of Watford and Ware', '', '../links/cases/Re A Contract between The Corporation of Watford and Ware.pdf', 'Yes', 'Shaen, Roscoe & Co,A N Schofield, Town Clerk, Watford', '1942', 'Appeal', 'Re A Contract between The Corporation of Watford and Warev A contract of sale of freehold property made in 1927 provided that the purchaser should pay £50 deposit and pay the balance of the purchase money, together with interest thereon at 5½ per cent per annum, by 25 equal annual instalments of £50 5s 10d.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-12-18', 'LAND '),
(6776, 'Re An Arbitration between Sea and Land Securities Ltd and William Dickinson & Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Re An Arbitration between Sea and Land Securities Ltd and William Dickinson.pdf', 'Yes', 'Sinclair Roche & Temperley., Ince Roscoe Wilson & Glover', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Re An Arbitration between Sea and Land Securities Ltd and William Dickinson & Co Ltd A ship was chartered for a period of six months. During that period the ship put into Blyth to load coal, and, there being a likelihood of some delay in loading, the charterers suggested to the owners that the opportunity should be taken to have the ship equipped with degaussing apparatus.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-03-30', 'SHIPPING'),
(6777, 'Re An Arbitration between Sea and Land Securities Ltd and William Dickinson & Co Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Re An Arbitration between Sea and Land Securities Ltd and William Dickinson.pdf', 'Yes', 'Sinclair Roche & Temperley., Ince Roscoe Wilson & Glover', '1940', 'Appeal', 'Re An Arbitration between Sea and Land Securities Ltd and William Dickinson & Co Ltd A ship was chartered for a period of six months. During that period the ship put into Blyth to load coal, and, there being a likelihood of some delay in loading, the charterers suggested to the owners that the opportunity should be taken to have the ship equipped with degaussing apparatus.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1940-03-30', 'SHIPPING'),
(6778, 'Re Arnold, Calvert v Whelan', '', '../links/cases/Re Arnold.pdf', 'Yes', 'Sharpe Pritchard & Co., Bremner Sons & Corlett., Turner & Co', '1942', 'Appeal', 'Re Arnold, Calvert v Whelan The practice of the court has been to grant leave to distribute the estate where the future liabilities are purely contingent. The practice was, it is said, carried to its extreme limit in Re Johnson, where the liabilities were not only possible liabilities, but very probable ones.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-02-26', 'SUCCESSION'),
(6779, 'Re Arnold, Calvert v Whelan', '', '../links/cases/Re Arnold.pdf', 'Yes', 'Sharpe Pritchard & Co., Bremner Sons & Corlett., Turner & Co', '1942', 'Appeal', 'Re Arnold, Calvert v Whelan The practice of the court has been to grant leave to distribute the estate where the future liabilities are purely contingent. The practice was, it is said, carried to its extreme limit in Re Johnson, where the liabilities were not only possible liabilities, but very probable ones.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-02-26', 'SUCCESSION'),
(6780, 'Re Dennis’ Settlement Trusts, Dennis v Dennis and Others', '', '../links/cases/Re Dennis.pdf', 'Yes', 'Ellis Munday & Clarke', '1942', 'High Court', 'Re Dennis’ Settlement Trusts, Dennis v Dennis and Others Under the terms of a settlement the income of the trust funds was given to R H D for life “until any such act or event shall happen … whereby the income of the trust funds would, if belonging to … R H D absolutely become vested in or charged in favour of some other person or persons …â€ Twelve years after the date of the settlement the settlor and R H D executed a supplementary deed of release and confirmation under which the trustees were to pay to R H D £1,000 per annum, instead of the whole of the income of the trust funds', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-03-20', 'TRUSTS'),
(6781, 'Re Dennis’ Settlement Trusts, Dennis v Dennis and Others', '', '../links/cases/Re Dennis.pdf', 'Yes', 'Ellis Munday & Clarke', '1942', 'High Court', 'Re Dennis’ Settlement Trusts, Dennis v Dennis and Others Under the terms of a settlement the income of the trust funds was given to R H D for life “until any such act or event shall happen … whereby the income of the trust funds would, if belonging to … R H D absolutely become vested in or charged in favour of some other person or persons …â€ Twelve years after the date of the settlement the settlor and R H D executed a supplementary deed of release and confirmation under which the trustees were to pay to R H D £1,000 per annum, instead of the whole of the income of the trust funds', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-03-20', 'TRUSTS'),
(6782, 'Re Hoff, Carnley v Hoff', '', '../links/cases/Re Hoff.pdf', 'Yes', 'Cameron Kemm & Co., S B Carnley & Tinn., Crossman Block & Co', '1942', 'Supreme', 'Re Hoff, Carnley v Hoff A special power of appointment among any child or children of his was vested in the appointor by the will of his grandfather who died in 1861. Four illegitimate children had been born to him some time before 1917.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-03-24', 'FAMILY'),
(6783, 'Re Jones’ Will Trusts, Jones v Jones', '', '../links/cases/Re Jones.pdf', 'Yes', 'Miller & Smiths., Field Roscoe & Co., Minshall Pugh & Co., Shelton Wearing & Bates', '1942', 'Appeal', 'Re Jones’ Will Trusts, Jones v Jones The testator made the following bequest in his will: “£1,000 to the Tettenhall College Investment Trustees appointed or to be appointed under special declaration of trust … executed by me bearing even date with this my last will and testament, or any substitution therefor or modification thereof or addition thereto which I may hereafter execute …â€', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-04-24', 'SUCCESSION'),
(6784, 'Re Jones’ Will Trusts, Jones v Jones', '', '../links/cases/Re Jones.pdf', 'Yes', 'Miller & Smiths., Field Roscoe & Co., Minshall Pugh & Co., Shelton Wearing & Bates', '1942', 'Appeal', 'Re Jones’ Will Trusts, Jones v Jones The testator made the following bequest in his will: “£1,000 to the Tettenhall College Investment Trustees appointed or to be appointed under special declaration of trust … executed by me bearing even date with this my last will and testament, or any substitution therefor or modification thereof or addition thereto which I may hereafter execute …â€', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-04-24', 'SUCCESSION'),
(6785, 'Re Ogilby, Ogilby v Wentworth-Stanley', '', '../links/cases/Re Ogilby.pdf', 'Yes', 'Mount Sterry & Co., Kenneth Brown Baker Baker', '1942', 'High Court', 'Re Ogilby, Ogilby v Wentworth-Stanley The first husband of the deceased was keenly interested in the breeding of shorthorn cattle. For this purpose he farmed some 180 acres. After his death his herd was disposed of, but later the deceased herself took up the breeding of shorthorn cattle on the same holdings.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-03-24', 'SUCCESSION'),
(6786, 'Re Ogilby, Ogilby v Wentworth-Stanley', '', '../links/cases/Re Ogilby.pdf', 'Yes', 'Mount Sterry & Co., Kenneth Brown Baker Baker', '1942', 'High Court', 'Re Ogilby, Ogilby v Wentworth-Stanley The first husband of the deceased was keenly interested in the breeding of shorthorn cattle. For this purpose he farmed some 180 acres. After his death his herd was disposed of, but later the deceased herself took up the breeding of shorthorn cattle on the same holdings.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-03-24', 'SUCCESSION'),
(6787, 'Re Parsons, Parsons v Parsons', '', '../links/cases/Re Parsons.pdf', 'Yes', 'Vizard Oldham Crowder & Cash., Owston & Co', '1942', 'High Court', 'Re Parsons, Parsons v Parsons The testatrix gave a legacy of £10,000 to her husband absolutely; and she gave the income of her residuary estate on trust for her husband for life and after his death in trust for her son absolutely. The husband disclaimed the legacy by a formal deed of disclaimer and the legacy fell into residue.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-05-07', 'TAXATION'),
(6788, 'Re Parsons, Parsons v Parsons', '', '../links/cases/Re Parsons.pdf', 'Yes', 'Vizard Oldham Crowder & Cash., Owston & Co', '1942', 'High Court', 'Re Parsons, Parsons v Parsons The testatrix gave a legacy of £10,000 to her husband absolutely; and she gave the income of her residuary estate on trust for her husband for life and after his death in trust for her son absolutely. The husband disclaimed the legacy by a formal deed of disclaimer and the legacy fell into residue.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-05-07', 'TAXATION'),
(6789, 'Re Royal Mutual Building Society’s Application (Turner)', '', '../links/cases/Re Royal Mutual Building Society.pdf', 'Yes', 'Simmons & Simmons., Kenneth Brown Baker Baker', '1942', 'High Court', 'Re Royal Mutual Building Society’s Application (Turner) Where a mortgagor is merely a nominee of a third party, the latter cannot be joined as respondent to an application by the mortgagees under the Courts (Emergency Powers) Acts 1939–1941, for leave to proceed to exercise any remedy which may be available to them.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-02-17', 'LAND '),
(6790, 'Re Royal Mutual Building Society’s Application (Turner)', '', '../links/cases/Re Royal Mutual Building Society.pdf', 'Yes', 'Simmons & Simmons., Kenneth Brown Baker Baker', '1942', 'High Court', 'Re Royal Mutual Building Society’s Application (Turner) Where a mortgagor is merely a nominee of a third party, the latter cannot be joined as respondent to an application by the mortgagees under the Courts (Emergency Powers) Acts 1939–1941, for leave to proceed to exercise any remedy which may be available to them.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-02-17', 'LAND '),
(6791, 'Re Smith & Fawcett Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Re Smith.pdf', 'Yes', 'Ward Bowie & Co,James A Lee & Priestley, Bradford', '1942', 'Appeal', 'Re Smith & Fawcett Ltd The articles of association of a private company provided that “the directors may at any time in their absolute and uncontrolled discretion refuse to register any transfer of shares.â€ The appellant, as executor of his father, claimed to be registered in respect of 4,001 shares.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-03-27', 'COMPANY'),
(6792, 'Re Smith & Fawcett Ltd', '', '../links/cases/Re Smith.pdf', 'Yes', 'Ward Bowie & Co,James A Lee & Priestley, Bradford', '1942', 'Appeal', 'Re Smith & Fawcett Ltd The articles of association of a private company provided that “the directors may at any time in their absolute and uncontrolled discretion refuse to register any transfer of shares.â€ The appellant, as executor of his father, claimed to be registered in respect of 4,001 shares.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-03-27', 'COMPANY'),
(6793, 'Re Waring, Westminster Bank Ltd v Awdry', '', '../links/cases/Re Waring.pdf', 'Yes', 'Bryan O’Connor & Co., Dennes & Co', '1942', 'High Court', 'Re Waring, Westminster Bank Ltd v Awdry This is the first decision under the Finance Act 1941, s 25, which varies the provisions of tax-free annuities. The provisions are to apply to all tax-free payments and a number of instruments and orders creating such payments are named.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-04-15', 'SUCCESSION'),
(6794, 'Re Waring, Westminster Bank Ltd v Awdry', '', '../links/cases/Re Waring.pdf', 'Yes', 'Bryan O’Connor & Co., Dennes & Co', '1942', 'High Court', 'Re Waring, Westminster Bank Ltd v Awdry This is the first decision under the Finance Act 1941, s 25, which varies the provisions of tax-free annuities. The provisions are to apply to all tax-free payments and a number of instruments and orders creating such payments are named.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-04-15', 'SUCCESSION'),
(6795, 'Re Woolgar, Woolgar v Hopkins', '', '../links/cases/Re Woolgar.pdf', 'Yes', 'Alfred Nisbet & Son., Radcliffes & Co', '1942', 'High Court', 'Re Woolgar, Woolgar v Hopkins The point here decided has been the subject of conflicting authorities, but it has generally been assumed, since the decision in Re Hedderwick in 1933, that Re Stillwell must be treated as an authority that it is out of line with previous authorities and not one which would be followed.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-04-21', 'SUCCESSION'),
(6796, 'Re Woolgar, Woolgar v Hopkins', '', '../links/cases/Re Woolgar.pdf', 'Yes', 'Alfred Nisbet & Son., Radcliffes & Co', '1942', 'High Court', 'Re Woolgar, Woolgar v Hopkins The point here decided has been the subject of conflicting authorities, but it has generally been assumed, since the decision in Re Hedderwick in 1933, that Re Stillwell must be treated as an authority that it is out of line with previous authorities and not one which would be followed.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-04-21', 'SUCCESSION'),
(6797, 'Robinson v Bailey', '', '../links/cases/Robinson v Bailey.pdf', 'Yes', 'Zeffertt Heard & Morley Lawson., C Grobel Son & Co', '1942', 'High Court', 'Robinson v Bailey A judgment dated 25 February 1941, ordered, inter alia, that the defendant should pay to the plaintiff such annual sum as after deduction of income tax at the standard rate for the time being in force would leave the clear sum of £50, such annual sum to be paid by quarterly instalments.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-02-24', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6798, 'Rodger v Varey', '', '../links/cases/Rodger v Varey.pdf', 'Yes', 'Robinson & Bradley., Gibson & Weldon', '1942', 'Appeal', 'Rodger v Varey An information was preferred against the respondent for failing to care for a child, who had been billeted with him, to the best of his ability, contrary to the Defence (General) Regulations, reg 22(11). The girl who had been billeted with the respondent attained the age of 14 years on 21 December 1940. The billeting notice was served on 17 March 1941.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-03-26', 'CONSTITUTIONAl'),
(6799, 'Rodger v Varey', '', '../links/cases/Rodger v Varey.pdf', 'Yes', 'Robinson & Bradley., Gibson & Weldon', '1942', 'Appeal', 'Rodger v Varey An information was preferred against the respondent for failing to care for a child, who had been billeted with him, to the best of his ability, contrary to the Defence (General) Regulations, reg 22(11). The girl who had been billeted with the respondent attained the age of 14 years on 21 December 1940. The billeting notice was served on 17 March 1941.', 'C St J Nicholson Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-03-26', 'CONSTITUTIONAl'),
(6800, 'Trustee in Bankruptcy of Bowring-Hanbury v Bowring-Hanbury', '', '../links/cases/Trustee in Bankruptcy of Bowring.pdf', 'Yes', 'Woolfe & Woolfe., Durrant Cooper & Hambling', '1942', 'Appeal', 'Trustee in Bankruptcy of Bowring-Hanbury v Bowring-Hanbury The defendant advanced £10,000 to his wife in December 1924, of which she repaid £1,000 in June 1929. She died in 1931, having by her will appointed the defendant her sole executor. For the purpose of obtaining a grant of probate, the defendant, in May, 1931, swore an inland revenue affidavit in which the debts listed as due from the wife included the debt of £9,000 due to him upon the loan.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-03-12', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6801, 'Trustee in Bankruptcy of Bowring-Hanbury v Bowring-Hanbury', '', '../links/cases/Trustee in Bankruptcy of Bowring.pdf', 'Yes', 'Woolfe & Woolfe., Durrant Cooper & Hambling', '1942', 'Appeal', 'Trustee in Bankruptcy of Bowring-Hanbury v Bowring-Hanbury The defendant advanced £10,000 to his wife in December 1924, of which she repaid £1,000 in June 1929. She died in 1931, having by her will appointed the defendant her sole executor. For the purpose of obtaining a grant of probate, the defendant, in May, 1931, swore an inland revenue affidavit in which the debts listed as due from the wife included the debt of £9,000 due to him upon the loan.', 'Irene G R Moses Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-03-12', 'CIVIL PROCEDURE'),
(6802, 'Wallrock v Equity and Law Life Assurance Society', '', '../links/cases/Wallrock v Equity and Law Life Assurance Society.pdf', 'Yes', 'Rooper & Whately., Finnis Downey Linnell & Price', '1942', 'Appeal', 'Wallrock v Equity and Law Life Assurance Society The appellants owned the reversion of certain premises held on lease by the respondent. The respondent had sublet part of the premises.', 'W K Scrivener Esq Barrister', 'Civil', '', '', '', '', '', '1942-03-31', 'LANDLORD AND TENANT');
