Brewer v Mann Queen ’s Bench Division 14 October 2010 Case Analysis Where Reported[2010] EWHC 2444 (QB); Official Transcript Case DigestSubject: Sale of goods Other related subjects: Sale of goods; Consumer law Keywords: Bailment; Breach of contract; Breach of warranty; Damages; Hire purchase; Misleading statements; Motor dealers; Trade descriptions; Warranties Summary: The claimant succeeded in her claims for breach of warranty and breach of contract in respect of the sale to her
Premium Contract Contract law
personality ’ as it was developed in Salomon v. Salomon & Co Ltd [1897] AC 22. Even though this doctrine is the stone head of the English company common law‚ the courts introduced several exceptions which undermined the ’veil of incorporation ’. The exceptions were firstly introduced in the mid-60s by Lord Denning in Littlewoods Mail Order Stores Ltd. V IRC [1969]‚ and allowed the court to lift the veil and hold the shareholders liable for the company ’s actions. The main reason for the courts to
Premium Corporation Corporations law Legal entities
P1: OTA c01 JWBK501-Kettell May 30‚ 2011 12:46 Printer: Yet to come 1 Case Study 1: Ijara Contract 1.1 LEARNING OUTCOMES After working through Case Study 1 you should be able to do the following: PY R IG HT ED MA TE RI AL r Define the Ijara contract. r Define the Ijara wa Iqtina contract. r Distinguish a conventional loan from Ijara. r Describe the elements of an Ijara transaction. r Contrast Ijara with the other modes of Islamic finance. r Identify
Premium Renting Leasing Islamic banking
ALLOCATION OF UNIFORM MARKS IN GCSE (APPLICABLE FROM JUNE 2010) What is a UMS? The Uniform Mark Scale (UMS) is used in unitised specifications as a device for reporting‚ recording and aggregating candidates’ unit test performances. Why do we need the UMS? In a unitised specification candidates may take units at different stages during the course and may retake units before certification. Each exam paper is unique‚ and so the difficulty of exams may vary slightly from year to year. Senior
Premium Grade The Unit
Romer v. Evans Kay Long HIS303: The American Constitution Instructor: Brandy Robinson May 27‚ 2013 U.S. Supreme Court Decision: Romer v. Evans An examination of the United States Supreme Court case Romer v. Evans‚ which was decided on May 20‚ 1996‚ is to be put forth in this paper. The case was argued on October 10‚ 1995. At issue was Amendment 2 to the State Constitution of Colorado “which precludes all legislative‚ executive‚ or judicial action at any level of state or local government
Premium Supreme Court of the United States United States United States Constitution
The way that a defendant has acted in defamation‚ brings up the question of how reasonable the defendant was when breaching the Defamation Act. The Issues in Hockey v Fairfax‚ in terms of reasonableness‚ stemmed from the way that Fairfax acted in the creation of the newspaper article titled “Treasurer for Sale” and the decision of the chosen title as well as the poster and three tweets‚ posted about the newspaper article. Reasonableness in the way that Fairfax acted is a necessary consideration
Premium Law Tort Duty of care
VMware vSphere Storage Appliance Installation and Configuration vSphere Storage Appliance 1.0 vSphere 5.0 This document supports the version of each product listed and supports all subsequent versions until the document is replaced by a new edition. To check for more recent editions of this document‚ see http://www.vmware.com/support/pubs. EN-000397-04 VMware vSphere Storage Appliance Installation and Configuration You can find the most up-to-date technical documentation on the
Premium IP address Hard disk drive
Course: Business Law. (BUS205) Assignment Title: Introduction to Law and Contracts Assignment #: Module One Case Should Yahoo have been forced to turn over Justin Ellsworth’s email to his parents? One in our shoes would venture to say “No”. Yahoo took a very firm stand backing its privacy acts that all account holders are entitled to as email address holders by saying nothing but “No”. I‚ in my opinion will say that Yahoo acted with legal responsibility in backing
Premium Law Lawyer Ethics
GENERAL DUTY OF CARE 3 3.0 SUMMARY OF CASE “DONOGHUE V STEVENSON” 3 3.1 ACTIONS TAKEN BY DONOGHUE 4 3.2 THE RESPONSE OF MR. STEVENSON 5 4.0 THE IMPLICATION OF CASE 5 5.0 THE JUDGEMENT 6 6.0 THE CONCLUSION 7 7.0 REFERENCES 8 1.0 INTRODUCTION Introduction to students the Lord Atkin’s concept of general duty of care‚ summary of the case “Donoghue v Stevenson” and its implication. It will also briefly explain
Premium Duty of care Tort Law
Alexa Englert Advanced legal writing unit 3 Kaplan University 11/5/11 Polovchak v. Meese‚ 774 F.2d 731 (1985)‚ Facts: U.S.S.R. citizens Michael and Anna Polovchak came to the United States with their three children and settled in Chicago. The Polovchaks decided to return to the U.S.S.R. at which time their older children Nataly who was 17‚ and Walter who was 12‚ went to live at their cousin’s house not wanting to leave the Unites States with their parents. Nataly and Walters parents sought
Free United States Appeal