Williams V Florida - Law Dictionary Search Results
Building
Tramway Company, (1878) 9 Ch D 425; Siegeberg v. Metropolitan District Railway Company, (1893) 49 LT 554; Greswolde Williams v. Newcastle-upon-Tyne Corpn., (1927) 92 JP 13; London Transport Executive v. Congregational Union of England and Wales (Inc), (1978)
Consideration
debt, without any other or fresh consideration, B. can nevertheless sue A. for the remaining 10l. See also Williams v. O'Keefe, 1910 AC 186, and a promise to pay by instalments is not sufficient consideration for extending time
Limitation of actions and prosecutions
land against trustees will be good against all persons claiming as cestui que trustent under their trust (see Williams v. Papworth, 1900 AC 563), but this does not apply in regard to any person affected with notice of
Keep your definitions linked to case research
Abstract of title
5 QB Ex 213 though the intermediate title before the statutory or agreed commencement need not be abstracted, Williams v. Spargo, 1893 WN 100. For other instances, see L. P. Act, 1925, s. 45, and Wolstenholme and Cherry,
Corpse
temporal courts, independently of spiritual censures, on indictment or information. There is no property in a dead body, Williams v. Williams, (1882) 20 Ch D 659. Dissection.--The (English) Anatomy Act, 1832 (2 & 3 Wm. 4, c. 75),
Precatory words
of late years the tendency has been the other way; see Hill v. Hill, (1897) 1 QB 483; Williams v. Williams, (1897) 2 Ch 12; Re Oldfield, (1904) 1 Ch 549; Comiskey v. Bowring-Hanbury, 1905 AC 84.
Cremation
body of their testator, although the will may direct some other person to cause it to be burnt, Williams v. Williams, (1882) 20 Ch D 659. If burial in consecrated ground and cremation are both desired, cremation should
Dower
a share in the land (if the dower has arisen before 1926) analogous to an undivided share, see Williams v. Thomas, (1909) 1 Ch 713; and Wolst. & Ch. Conv. Acts, 12th Edn. P. 941. The following note
Dog
of the (English) Dogs Act, 1871. 'Dangerous,' as used here, is not confined to meaning dangerous to mankind, Williams v. Richards, (1907) 2 KB 88. Board of Agriculture Orders.--S. 2 of the (English) Act of 1906 empowers the
En ventre sa mere
and may also be a 'dependant' within the (English) Workmen's Compensation Act, 1906 (6 Edw. 7, c. 58) [Williams v. Ocean Coal Company, (1907) 2 KB 422; Orrell Colliery v. Schofield, (1909) AC 433]. See now the (English)
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »
Try the research workspace - 7 days free