Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Leslie, William (October 1957). "Similarities in Lord Mansfield's and Joseph Story's View of Fundamental Law". The American Journal of Legal History. 1 (4): 278– 307. doi:10.2307/844022. ISSN 0002-9319. JSTOR 844022. Lowry, Todd (December 1973). "Lord Mansfield and the Law Merchant: Law and Economics in the Eighteenth Century". Journal of ...
Somerset v Stewart (1772) 98 ER 499 (also known as Sommersett v Steuart, Somersett's case, and the Mansfield Judgment) is a judgment of the English Court of King's Bench in 1772, relating to the right of an enslaved person on English soil not to be forcibly removed from the country and sent to Jamaica for sale.
Robinson v Robinson (1756) 96 ER 999, Lord Mansfield's first case, holding a will effective if, even uncertainly, it does "manifest general intent" Cooper v Chitty (1756) 1 Burr 36, trover and conversion; R v Richardson (1758) 97 ER 426, principles of representative accountability in companies
The year Copley painted him he made a major ruling in the case of the Zong slave-trading ship. Mansfield's own great-niece Dido Elizabeth Belle was a daughter of an enslaved woman. Copley was an American artist who emigrated to Britain in 1774 and enjoyed success with his history paintings, although he continued to produce portraits.
[1] [2] Dido was the great niece of Lord Chief Justice Lord Mansfield who made notable rulings limiting the practice of slavery and the slave trade, notably Somersett's Case and the Zong trial. The 2013 film Belle drew inspiration from the painting. [3] It was once attributed to the German-born artist Johan Zoffany.
Lord Mansfield was the pre-eminent judge of his age, and decided a host of seminal cases, many of which laid the foundations for commercial law and remain good law to this day. Pages in category "Lord Mansfield cases"
As a result, Lord Mansfield, Chief Justice of the Court of the King's Bench, had to judge whether Somersett's abduction was lawful or not under English Common Law. No legislation had ever been passed to establish slavery in England. The case received national attention, and five advocates supported the action on behalf of Somersett.
Lord Mansfield subsequently commented upon his decision in the Somersett case in R v Inhabitants of Thames Ditton (1785) [20] The official report notes that Mansfield expressed the view during counsel's argument that his ruling in the Somerset case decided only that a slave could not be forcibly removed from England against his will: "The ...