Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In Manifest Shipping Co Ltd v Uni-Polaris Shipping Co Ltd [1] John Hobhouse, Baron Hobhouse of Woodborough said, . As Lord Mustill points out, Lord Mansfield was at the time attempting to introduce into English commercial law a general principle of good faith, an attempt which was ultimately unsuccessful and only survived for limited classes of transactions, one of which was insurance.
Moses v Macferlan (1760) 2 Burr 1005, unjust enrichment, or quasi-contract; Pillans & Rose v Van Mierop & Hopkins (1765) 3 Burr 1663, irrelevance of consideration; Carter v Boehm (1766) 3 Burr 1905, good faith principle in context of insurance; Alderson v Temple (1768) 96 ER 384, on fraudulent preferences in insolvency aimed at equality
The European principle was based on the assumption of good faith on the part of the merchants, or uberrima fides, something completely lacking in English law. [47] In Carter v Boehm (1746) 3 Burr 1905, 96 ER 342, Mansfield got a chance to reform the law relating to the
The principles underlying this rule were stated by Lord Mansfield in the leading and often-quoted case of Carter v Boehm (1766) 97 ER 1162, 1164, Insurance is a contract of speculation...
Carter v Boehm (1766) on good faith; Da Costa v Jones (1778) Hochster v De La Tour (1853) on anticipatory breach; Smith v Hughes (1871) on unilateral mistake and the objective approach to interpretation of contracts; Foakes v Beer [1] (1884) on part payments of debt (with a notable dissenting opinion by Lord Blackburn)
The law of misrepresentation is an amalgam of contract and tort; and its sources are common law, equity and statute. In England and Wales, the common law was amended by the Misrepresentation Act 1967. The general principle of misrepresentation has been adopted by the United States and other former British colonies, e.g. India.
The law is heralded as a significant driver in producing a robust and successful women’s athletic movement in the United States and on the world stage at the Olympics.
The Moorcock (1889) 14 PD 64 is a leading English contract law case which created an important test for identifying the main terms that the law will imply in commercial, or non-consumer, agreements, especially terms that are "necessary and obvious...to give business efficacy". Terms shall not be implied merely because they appear "desirable and ...