|
Landmark Cases In Family Law
{{italic title ''Landmark Cases in Family Law'' (2011) is a book of chapters contributed by various authors, which outlines the key cases in English family law. Content The cases discussed are, *'' The Roos case'' (1670): Rebecca Probert, Associate Professor, University of Warwick. *'' J v C and Another'' 970AC 668L: Nigel Lowe, Professor of Law, Cardiff University. *''Corbett v Corbett'' (Orse. Ashley)971P 83: Stephen Gilmore, Senior Lecturer in Law, King's College London. *'' Burns v Burns'' 984Ch 317.: John Mee, University College Cork. *'' Szechter (Orse. Karsov) v Szechter'' 971P 286: Mary Hayes, Emeritus Professor, University of Sheffield. *'' S v S''; '' W v Official Solicitor'' 972AC 24: Andrew Bainham, Fellow of Christ's College, University of Cambridge. *'' Poel v Poel'' 9701 WLR 1469: Rachel Taylor, University of Oxford. *'' Wachtel v Wachtel'' 973Fam 72: Gillian Douglas, Professor of Law, Cardiff University. *'' Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech AHA'' 986AC 112 ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
English Family Law
English family law concerns the law relating to family matters in England and Wales. Family law concerns a host of authorities, agencies and groups which participate in or influence the outcome of private disputes or social decisions involving family law. Such a view of family law may be regarded as assisting the understanding of the context in which the law works and to indicate the policy areas where improvements can be made. The UK is made up of three jurisdictions: Scotland, Northern Ireland, and England and Wales. Each has quite different systems of family law and courts. This article concerns only England and Wales. Family law encompasses divorce, adoption, wardship, child abduction and parental responsibility. It can either be public law or private law. Family law cases are heard in the Family Justice System of England and Wales in both county courts and family proceedings courts (magistrates' court), both of which operate under codes of Family Procedure Rules. There is ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
X (Minors) V Bedfordshire County Council Etc
X, or x, is the twenty-fourth and third-to-last letter in the Latin alphabet, used in the modern English alphabet, the alphabets of other western European languages and others worldwide. Its name in English is ''"ex"'' (pronounced ), plural ''exes''."X", ''Oxford English Dictionary'', 2nd edition (1989); ''Merriam-Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language, Unabridged'' (1993); "ex", ''op. cit''. X is regularly pronounced as "ks". History In Ancient Greek, ' Χ' and ' Ψ' were among several variants of the same letter, used originally for and later, in western areas such as Arcadia, as a simplification of the digraph 'ΧΣ' for . In the end, more conservative eastern forms became the standard of Classical Greek, and thus 'Χ' ''(Chi)'' stood for (later ; palatalized to in Modern Greek before front vowels). However, the Etruscans had taken over 'Χ' from western Greek, and it therefore stands for in Etruscan and Latin. The letter 'Χ' ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
English Law
English law is the common law legal system of England and Wales, comprising mainly criminal law and civil law, each branch having its own courts and procedures. Principal elements of English law Although the common law has, historically, been the foundation and prime source of English law, the most authoritative law is statutory legislation, which comprises Acts of Parliament, regulations and by-laws. In the absence of any statutory law, the common law with its principle of '' stare decisis'' forms the residual source of law, based on judicial decisions, custom, and usage. Common law is made by sitting judges who apply both statutory law and established principles which are derived from the reasoning from earlier decisions. Equity is the other historic source of judge-made law. Common law can be amended or repealed by Parliament. Not being a civil law system, it has no comprehensive codification. However, most of its criminal law has been codified from its common la ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Landmark Cases In Equity
{{italic title ''Landmark Cases in Equity'' (2012) is a book edited by Charles Mitchell and Paul Mitchell, which outlines the key cases in English trusts law and equity. Content The cases discussed are, *'' The Earl of Oxford's Case'' (1615) David Ibbetson *'' Coke v Fountaine'' (1676) Mike Macnair *'' Grey v Grey'' (1677) Jamie Glister *''Penn v Lord Baltimore'' (1750) Paul Mitchell *'' Burgess v Wheate'' (1759) Paul Matthews *'' Morice v Bishop of Durham'' (1805) Joshua Getzler *''Tulk v Moxhay'' (1848) Ben McFarlane *''Prince Albert v Strange'' (1849) Lionel Bently *''Ramsden v Dyson'' (1866) Nick Piska *'' Bishop of Natal v Gladstone'' (1866) Charlotte Smith *'' Earl of Aylesford v Morris'' (1873) Catharine MacMillan *''Re Hallett's Estate'' (1879–80) Graham Virgo *'' North-West Transportation Co Ltd v Beatty'' (1887) Lionel Smith *''Rochefoucauld v Boustead'' (1897) Ying Khai Liew *'' Re Earl of Sefton'' (1898) Chantal Stebbings *''Nocton v Lord Ashburton'' (19 ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Landmark Cases In Contract
A landmark is a recognizable natural or artificial feature used for navigation, a feature that stands out from its near environment and is often visible from long distances. In modern use, the term can also be applied to smaller structures or features, that have become local or national symbols. Etymology In old English the word ''landmearc'' (from ''land'' + ''mearc'' (mark)) was used to describe a boundary marker, an "object set up to mark the boundaries of a kingdom, estate, etc.". Starting from approx. 1560, this understanding of landmark was replaced by a more general one. A landmark became a "conspicuous object in a landscape". A ''landmark'' literally meant a geographic feature used by explorers and others to find their way back or through an area. For example, the Table Mountain near Cape Town, South Africa is used as the landmark to help sailors to navigate around southern tip of Africa during the Age of Exploration. Artificial structures are also sometimes built t ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Landmark Cases In The Law Of Tort
''Landmark Cases in the Law of Tort'' (2010) is a book edited by Charles Mitchell and Paul Mitchell, which outlines the key cases in English tort law. Content The cases discussed are, * '' R v Pease'' (1832): Mark Wilde and Charlotte Smith * '' Buron v Denman'' (1848) Charles Mitchell and Leslie Urano * ''George v Skivington'' (1869) David Ibbetson * '' Daniel v Metropolitan Railway Company'' (1871) Michael Lobban * '' Woodley v Metropolitan District Railway Company'' (1877) Steve Banks * '' Cavalier v Pope'' (1906) Richard Baker and Jonathan Garton * ''Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd'' (1963) Paul Mitchell * '' Goldman v Hargrave'' (1967) Mark Lunney * '' Tate & Lyle Food & Distribution Ltd v Greater London Council'' (1983) J. W. Neyers * '' Smith v Littlewoods Organisation Ltd'' (1985) Elspeth Reid * ''Alcock v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police'' (1991) Donal Nolan * ''Hunter v Canary Wharf Ltd'' (1997) Maria Lee * ''Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Servi ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Landmark Cases In The Law Of Restitution
{{italic title ''Landmark Cases in the Law of Restitution'' (2006) is a book edited by Charles Mitchell and Paul Mitchell, which outlines the key cases in English unjust enrichment law and restitution. Content The cases discussed are, *'' Lampleigh v Brathwait'' (1615) *''Moses v Macferlan'' (1760) *''Taylor v Plumer'' (1815) *'' Planche v Colburn'' (1831) *'' Marsh v Keating'' (1834) *''Erlanger v New Sombrero Phosphate Co'' (1878) *''Phillips v Homfray'' (1883) *''Allcard v Skinner'' (1887) *''Sinclair v Brougham'' (1914) *'' Fibrosa Spolka Akcyjna v Fairbairn Lawson Coombe Barbour Ltd'' (1942) *''Re Diplock'' (1948) *''Solle v Butcher'' (1950) See also *Landmark case *Restitution in English law *''Landmark Cases in the Law of Contract'' (2008) by Charles Mitchell and Paul Mitchell *'' Landmark Cases in the Law of Tort'' (2010) by Charles Mitchell and Paul Mitchell *''Landmark Cases in Family Law {{italic title ''Landmark Cases in Family Law'' (2011) is a book of chapters con ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Restitution In English Law
The English law of Restitution is the law of gain-based recovery. Its precise scope and underlying principles remain a matter of significant academic and judicial controversy. Broadly speaking, the law of restitution concerns actions in which one person claims an entitlement in respect of a ''gain'' acquired by another, rather than compensation for a ''loss''. Framework Many academic commentators have sought to impose structure upon the law of restitution by searching for a common rationale and constructing taxonomies of the various types of claim. Whether such frameworks can account for the diverse range of restitutionary claims remains a controversial question. The implications of such frameworks for the relationship between law and Equity has often been a significant flashpoint in academic and judicial debate. As the law currently stands, the law of restitution can be usefully divided into (at least) three broad categories: * Restitution for unjust enrichment * Restitution for ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Landmark Case
Landmark court decisions, in present-day common law legal systems, establish precedents that determine a significant new legal principle or concept, or otherwise substantially affect the interpretation of existing law. "Leading case" is commonly used in the United Kingdom and other Commonwealth jurisdictions instead of "landmark case", as used in the United States. In Commonwealth countries, a reported decision is said to be a ''leading decision'' when it has come to be generally regarded as settling the law of the question involved. In 1914, Canadian jurist Augustus Henry Frazer Lefroy said "a 'leading case' sone that settles the law upon some important point". A leading decision may settle the law in more than one way. It may do so by: * Distinguishing a new principle that refines a prior principle, thus departing from prior practice without violating the rule of '' stare decisis''; * Establishing a "test" (that is, a measurable standard that can be applied by courts in futur ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Fitzpatrick V Sterling Housing Association
''Fitzpatrick v Sterling Housing Association Ltd'' was a 1999 legal case heard by the Judicial Committee of the House of Lords regarding the meaning of the word 'family' with regards to the Rent Act 1977. The Lords found that a gay couple living together could be seen as a family for the purposes of housing law, and that a family relationship did not require either a blood relationship (as between parent and child) or marriage (at the time, neither marriage nor civil partnerships were available for same-sex couples). Under the Rent Act (and later amendments under the Housing Act 1998), protected tenants could pass on their tenancy to spouses or cohabiting family members upon their death. The claimant in this case, Martin Fitzpatrick, had lived with his partner John Thompson from 1976 until his death in 1994, having met in 1969. Thompson had rented the flat from 1972 onwards. The law allows for succession in a tenancy agreement for spouses, those "living with him or her as a husba ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
White V White
''White v White'' is an English family law decision by the House of Lords, and a landmark case in redistribution of finances as well as property on divorce. This case involved a couple with assets exceeding £4.5m which was deemed more than either needs for their reasonable requirements. It was held that the absence of financial need did not mean departing from a more generous settlement for an applicant in big money cases. This, therefore, enables the courts to make settlements reflecting the wealth of the parties, and not just their needs and requirements. It is clear from Lord Nicholls' leading speech that he intended much of what he said to apply to all matrimonial financial proceedings, not just big money ones. He said that in all cases, regardless of division of assets, a judge would always be well advised to check his tentative views (on distribution of assets) against the "yardstick of equality of division". This was not to introduce a presumption of equality in all case ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
R V R
is a decision in which the House of Lords determined that under English criminal law, it is a crime for a husband to rape his wife. In 1990, the defendant, referred to in the judgment only as R to protect the identity of the victim, had been convicted of attempting to rape his wife. He appealed the conviction on the grounds of a purported marital rape exemption under common law. R claimed that it was not legally possible for a husband to rape his wife, as the wife had given irrevocable consent to sexual intercourse with her husband through the contract of marriage, which she could not subsequently withdraw. Both the Court of Appeal and the House of Lords upheld the rape conviction, declaring that a marital rape exemption did not exist in English law and that therefore, it is possible for a husband to rape his wife. Legal history The impossibility of marital rape under English common law was suggested in Sir Matthew Hale’s ''Historia Placitorum Coronæ'' (''History o ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
