Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Da Costa v Jones (1778) 2 Cowp 729; HIH Casualty and General Insurance Ltd v Chase Manhattan Bank Rix LJ stated, "I am conscious that in Carter v. Boehm itself Lord Mansfield does seem to have considered that there was a difference between the concealment which the duty of good faith prohibited and mere silence (‘Aliud est celare; aliud ...
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)
Uberrima fides (sometimes seen in its genitive form uberrimae fidei) is a Latin phrase meaning "utmost good faith" (literally, "most abundant faith").It is the name of a legal doctrine which governs insurance contracts.
Carter v Boehm; D. Da Costa v Jones; Director General of Fair Trading v First National Bank plc; M. Mutual Life Insurance Co of New York v Rank Organisation Ltd
Main page; Contents; Current events; Random article; About Wikipedia; Contact us; Pages for logged out editors learn more
The NCAA and power conferences cast votes this week in support of settling three antitrust cases (House, Hubbard and Carter), approving terms that feature nearly $2.8 billion in back damages; a ...
Lambert v Co-operative Insurance Society Ltd [1975] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 485 is an English contract law case concerning misrepresentation. It is an example of the operation of a positive duty of good faith in contracts for insurance.
In short, the Hubbard case seeks back compensation stemming from the Alston Supreme Court decision, and Carter is seeking to eliminate all NCAA rules prohibiting athlete compensation.