Case Law

Question 1

separate legal personality

Answer 1

solomon v solomon

Question 2

Weighted voting if against director

Answer 2

Bushell v Faith

Question 3

Holding out: representation that a person is a partner in a firm.

Answer 3

Sangster v Biddulphs

Question 4

Actual authority, relationship between company and third party only.

Answer 4

Freeman

Question 5

Act in good faith in the interests of the company.

Answer 5

Smith v Fawcett

Question 6

Features of a floating charge: is it an equitable charge over the whole or part fo an asset, are they constantly changing, and can the company deal with it in the ordinary course?

Answer 6

Re Yorkshire

Question 7

Transactions at an undervalue: granting a security on assets does not decrease the value of the property therefore not a transaction at an undervalue.

Answer 7

Re MC Bacon

Question 8

Restrictive covenants

Answer 8

Tulk v moxhay

Question 9

Conditional easements - if you want to use the benefit, you must have the burden of the positive covenant.

Answer 9

Halsbury v Brizell

Question 10

Implied grant as easements to the buyer : all rights which are continuous and apparent and necessary for enjoyment

Answer 10

Wheeldon v Burrows

Question 11

Damages are recoverable under normal contractual rules.

Answer 11

Hadley v Baxendale

Question 12

Self help remedy.

Answer 12

Jarvis v Harris

Question 13

Specific performance

Answer 13

land

Rainbow Estates Ltd

Question 14

Informal severance: acts operating on joint tenants share, mutual agreement, course of dealings.

Answer 14

Williams v Hensman

Question 15

Testator must have mental capacity: know the name of his acts, the extent of property and the moral claims.

Answer 15

Banks v Goodfellow

Question 16

Benjamin Order, authorises the PRs to distribute the estate on the basis that the unknown claimant is dead.

Answer 16

Re Benjamin 1902

Question 17

Golden rule for mental capacity. When a solicitor has doubts as to the capacity, medical opinion should be sought and signed of the will, and witnessed and approved by a medical practitioner.

Answer 17

Kenwood v Adams

Question 18

By way of case stated is NOT efficient, should simply appeal to crown court.

Answer 18

Brett v DPP

Question 19

Important explanatory evidence : can be evidence to explain the defendant’s motive for committing offence.

Answer 19

Campbell 2005

Question 20

New evidence, if new and compelling and in the interests of justice.

Answer 20

Dunlop 2006

Question 21

Submission of no case to answer. If the prosecution failed to put forward evidence to prove.

Answer 21

Galbraith 1981

Question 22

Newton hearing

Answer 22

Newton 1983

Question 23

Turnbull warnings

Answer 23

Turnbull 1977

Question 24

Indication of sentence in the PTPH to give a defendant an advance indication.

Answer 24

Goodyear 2005

Question 25

Reasons for breach and to reduce sanctions

Answer 25

Denton v White 2014

Question 26

Interim injunction application grounds

Answer 26

American Cyanamid v Ethicon 1975

Question 27

ADR must be determined having regard to the circumstances of the case.

Answer 27

Halsey Principles

Question 28

Builds on Donoghue. If duty of care should be imposed.
Reasonable foresight of harm
Sufficient proximity of relationship
Fair, just and reasonable

Answer 28

Caparo

Question 29

Secondary victims
No duty of care if all requirements are not satisfied:
Foreseeability of psychiatric harm
Proximity of relationship
Proximity in time and space
Proximity of perception

Answer 29

Alcock v Yorkshire Police

Question 30

Special standards for skilled defendant
Greater degree of skill and care than the reasonable person.
Reasonable person WITH the skills of the defendant.
Skilled defendant. If the D can show that a reasonable body of professional opinion, judged not to be negligent.

Answer 30

Bolam

Question 31

Skilled defendant. If the D can show that a reasonable body of professional opinion, judged not to be negligent.

Answer 31

Bolitho

Question 32

Pure economic loss
Duty of care not owed in a social situation, no assumption of responsibility.

Answer 32

Chaudhry

Question 33

Neighbourhood principle, whether the defendant owes a duty of care in a novel situation. Must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would injury your neighbour

Answer 33

Donoghue v Stevenson

Question 34

Fair, just and reasonable - for duty of care.

Answer 34

Hill v Chief Yorkshire

Question 35

If Defendant’s decision was reasonable, and had a small risk of injury, not negligent.

Answer 35

Latimer

Question 36

Special standards
Learned driver is seen as a reasonably competent driver.

Answer 36

Nettleship v Weston

Question 37

Remoteness of damage
Test of reasonable foreseeability. Reasonable person must have foreseen the damage.
Similar in type rule and egg-shell skull rule

Answer 37

Wagonmound Test

Question 38

An escape of something dangerous in the course of a non-natural use of land, which causes damage.

Answer 38

Rylands v Fletcher

Question 39

Pure economic loss
Duty of care owed if there is a special resolution between D and C.
Assumption of responsibility plus reasonable reliance by C.

Answer 39

Hedley Byrne