Johnson V Bishop - Law Dictionary Search Results
Costs
subject. See R. v. Archbishop of Canterbury, (1902) 2 KB 571; Thomas v. Pritchard, (1903) 1 KB 212; Johnson v. King,1904 AC 824; Rwland v. Air Council, 1923 WN 72; Re Carbonit, 1923, WN 208. Several Acts (English)
Church Discipline Act (English)
which 'it shall be lawful for' the bishop of the diocese (but not obligatory on him: see Julius v. Bishop of Oxford, (1880) 5 App Cas 214) on the application of any party complaining to proceed against any
Presentation
A corporation aggregate presents by the corporate name under their common seal. A patron may present himself, Walsh v. Bishop of Lincoln, (1875) LR 10 CP 518. The sale of the right of next presentation is invalidated by
Keep your definitions linked to case research
Dog
Vict. c. 15), and this s. is amended by s. 5 of the (English) Dogs Act, 1906. See Johnson v. Wilson, (1909) 2 KB 497. No duty is payable for dogs under six months old (Act of 1867,
Wager
the courts were bound to enforce, so long as it was not against morality, decency, or sound policy, Johnson v. Lumley, (1852) 12 CB 468. But by the (English) Gaming Act, 1845, s. 18: All contracts or agreements,
Railway
exceeding the tolls by the special Act authorized to be taken by them. The section is permissive only, Johnson v. Midland Ry. Co., (1849) 18 LJ Ex 366; but the Railway Commissioners may compel a company to act
Under-lease
or in deed, which exist between the original lessor and lessee [Holford v. Hatch (1779) 1 Dougl 183; Johnson v. Wild, (1890) 44 Ch D 146]; but the lessor can distrain on the sub-lessee or take advantage of
Fieri facias
writ is sued out; but he cannot seize money or bank notes after the death of the debtor, Johnson v. Pickering, (1908) 1 KB 1. A writ of execution that directs a marshal or sheriff to seize and
Amends, tender of
sum tendered, etc. As to tender upon distress (q.v.), whether before or after impounding but before sale, see Johnson v. Upham, (1859) 2 E&E 250. For wrongful distress, see (English) Distress for Rent Act, 1737, and for trespass
Arches, Court of
tit. 'Privy Council,' provided that the appeal should be to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, Wakeford v. Bishop of Lincoln, (1921) 1 AC 813. Consult Phillimore's Ecclesiastical Law; Wheeler's Privy Council Law. The jurisdiction of the
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »
Try the research workspace - 7 days free