7-Felthouse v Bindley (1862) 11 CBNS 869 (CCP) Summary: • “For a contract to come into existence‚ the offeree had to communicate his acceptance of the relevant offer to the offeror.” • This means that for a contract to come into play it has to be a bilateral agreement. One party cannot decide to enter someone else in a contract. Also‚ the case implies that changes in a contract nullify prior acceptances- if the contract changes‚ you need to agree the terms again. The Case: • F[elthouse]
Premium Contract
Plessy v. Ferguson 14th amendment- equal protection Argued 1896‚ Decided-1896 Louisiana placed a law giving separate railway cars for blacks and whites. In 1892‚ Homer Plessy- 7/8 Caucasian‚ sat in a "whites only" car of a Louisiana train‚ and refused to move to the car for blacks and was then arrested. The Court had to decide whether the Louisiana law was unconstitutional under the 14th amendment. The Court ruled that the state law was within its constitutional boundaries. The majority of this
Premium Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution Plessy v. Ferguson Brown v. Board of Education
NOTES OF CASES THECASEOF THE SLIPPERY EQUITY IN Re Vandervell’s Trusts (No. 2)‚’ Lord Denning M.R. said: “ (‘ Hard cases make bad law ’) is a maxim which is quite misleading. It should be deleted from our vocabulary. It comes to this: ‘Unjust decisions make good law’: whereas they do nothing of the kind. Every unjust decision is a reproach to the law or to the judge who administers it.”a Now that it has been decided that there is to be no appeal from the decision of the Court of Appeal‚ it is worth
Premium Law Common law Criminal law
1/23/2015 BURNETT v. WESTMINSTER BANK‚ LTD. | Islamicbanker’s Weblog Islamicbanker’s Weblog Just another WordPress.com weblog BURNETT v. WESTMINSTER BANK‚ LTD. BURNETT v. WESTMINSTER BANK‚ LTD. QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION [1966] 1 QB 742‚ [1965] 3 All ER 81‚ [1965] 3 WLR 863‚ [1965] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 218‚ 8 Legal Decisions Affecting Bankers 424 HEARING-DATES: 31 May‚ 1‚ 25 June 1965 25 June 1965 CATCHWORDS: Bank — Cheque — Condition restricting use — New cheque book on bank’s change to computer mechanisation
Premium Bank Cheque Contract
Subashini Rajasingam v. Saravanan Thangathoray & Other Appeals [2008] 2 CLJ 1 FC Summary of the case: (4 marks) There were three appeals (02-19-2007(W)‚ 02-20-2007(W) and 02-21-2007(W)) before us and with the agreements of the parties‚ they were heard together. The parties to the three appeals were originally Hindus husband and wife; they were married pursuant to a civil ceremony of marriage that was registered on 26 July 2001 pursuant to the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976 (the 1976
Premium Marriage Appeal
conditions. By fulfilling the required conditions‚ the person becomes an offeree and is therefore eligible to claim the reward. The above principle of law regarding an offer made to the entire world is established in Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co (1893) 1 QB 256. In this case‚ the newspaper advert by the Carbolic Smoke Ball Company stated the reward of £100 for anyone who contracted flu after using the product as instructed. On top of it the
Premium Invitation to treat Newspaper Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company
Article IV‚ section 1‚ of the constitution‚ requires that states honor the public acts and judicial decisions that takes place in another state called the “full faith and credit clause”. For instance‚ if two people are married in Atlanta and it is regulated by the law Texas has to recognize them as married even though it was not initiated in Texas. All the same if a practice is against their beliefs the states are not required to recognize the marriage. The tenth amendment is known as the reserved
Premium License United States Constitution Federal government of the United States
ruled that Tuskegee city officials redrew the cities boundaries unconstitutionally so that the white candidates in the cities political race could win and the blacks’ votes would not count. This case laid the framework for the passage of the 1965 voters rights act which outlawed discrimination in voting. The case was named after a Tuskegee university professor Charlie A. Gomillion who was the plaintiff and the defendant was the mayor of Tuskegee Phillip M. Lightfoot. Gomillion tried to make it easier
Premium Supreme Court of the United States United States American Civil War
1. In the case of Hampton v. Snead State Community College (SSCC)‚ the one element that Hampton failed to establish of a prima facie case of racial discrimination was the forth element in the case. The forth element in the case stated‚ “SSCC treated similarly situated employees outside of Hampton’s protected class more favorably” (Hampton). According to the court‚ Hampton failed to establish the prima facie case of bring substantial evidence of employees of another race who were tried fairly. The
Premium Prima facie Arbitration Legal burden of proof
The Furman v. Georgia decision of the Supreme Court was the first time in history where a higher court had ruled against capital punishment. However‚ the Supreme Court later suggested new legislation that overturned the ruling that capital punishment was cruel and unusual (Bohm‚ 1997). Opponents for the death penalty were elated. Executions such as drownings‚ crucifixions and burning at the stake were carried out for things such as marrying those of Jewish accent‚ non-confession by criminals and
Premium