82,903
edits
Tai Hing Cotton Mill v Liu Chong Hing Bank: Difference between revisions
Tai Hing Cotton Mill v Liu Chong Hing Bank (view source)
Revision as of 11:23, 17 July 2019
, 17 July 2019no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
A case, sadly now discredited, on [[concurrent liability]] in [[contract]] and [[tort]]. | {{cn}}A case, sadly now discredited, on [[concurrent liability]] in [[contract]] and [[tort]]. | ||
Neatly summed up by Lord Scarman, thus: | Neatly summed up by Lord Scarman, thus: | ||
Their lordships do not believe that there is anything to the advantage of the law’s development in searching for a liability in tort where the parties are in a contractual relationship. | |||
Sadly, overruled by {{casenote|Henderson|Merrett}}. | Sadly, overruled by {{casenote|Henderson|Merrett}}. | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
A good chap, that Lord Scarman. | A good chap, that Lord Scarman. | ||
{{sa}} | |||
*[[concurrent liability]] | *[[concurrent liability]] | ||
*[[negligence, fraud or wilful default]] | *[[negligence, fraud or wilful default]] | ||