LBPlasticsLtd. v. SwishProductsLtd. , ref 1979 R.P.C. 551, 1979 F.S.R. 145 H.L. ref ref cite web url http docs.law.gwu.edu facweb claw ch3a.htm Swish title Chapter 3A I.P. Protection of Digital Rights in the New Millennium publisher docs.law.gwu.edu accessdate 2008 12 23 last first ref is a 1979 decision of the Judicial functions of the House of Lords House of Lords as to whether a physical object is an infringing copy of a drawing depicting the object. The House of Lords held that it is, at least when an ordinary person could recognize that physical object was that which the drawing depicted. The House of Lords later reaffirmed the principle stated in this case in British Leyland Motor Corp. v. Armstrong Patents Co. , ref http www.uea.ac.uk n045 courses 2004 IIPL documents british leyland.pdf Leyland 1986 A.C. 577, 1986 All E.R. 850 H.L. ref ref cite web url http docs.law.gwu.edu facweb claw ch3a.htm Leyland title Chapter 3A I.P. Protection of Digital Rights in the New Millennium publisher docs.law.gwu.edu accessdate 2008 12 23 last first ref saying that it must be regarded as settled law . The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in Canon K.K. v. Green Cartridge Co. ref 1997 A.C. 728, 1997 F.S.R. 817. ref again reaffirmed the principle. The position under United States United States copyright law federal copyright law is diametrically opposite. ref See, e.g., Muller v. Triboro Bridge Authority, 43 F. Supp. 298 S.D.N.Y. 1942 . See also Copyright , section captioned What is a copy? ref See also Copyright law of the United Kingdom References reflist DEFAULTSORT LbPlasticsLtd. V. SwishProductsLtd. Category House of Lords cases Category United Kingdom copyright case law Category 1979 in the United Kingdom Category 1979 in case law UK law stub ... more details
Infobox Court Case name Shanklin Pier Ltdv Detel ProductsLtd court High Court of Justice King s Bench Division image Muelle El Quisco 02.JPG date decided full name citations 1951 2 KB 854 judges McNair J prior actions subsequent actions opinions transcripts keywords collateral contracts, consideration, privity of contract Shanklin Pier Ltdv Detel ProductsLtd 1951 2 KB 854 is a leading judgment on the subject of collateral contract s in English contract law . In it the High Court of Justice King s Bench Division created the principle of collateral contracts, an exception to the rule of privity of contract where a contract may be given Consideration under English law consideration by entering into another contract. Facts Shanklin Pier Ltd hired a contractor to paint Shanklin Pier . They spoke to Detel ProductsLtd about whether a particular paint was suitable to be used, and Detel assured them that it was, and that it would last for at least seven years. ref name beale Beale 2002 p.55 ref On the basis of this conversation Shanklin Pier Ltd instructed the contractors to use a particular paint, which they did. The paint started to peel after three months, and Shanklin Pier attempted to claim compensation from Detel Products. ref name beale This was complicated by the fact that there was no direct contract between the two companies, only between Shanklin Pier and the contractors, and between the contractors and Detel Products. Judgment McNair J s judgment read Cquote This case raises an interesting and comparatively novel question whether or not an enforceable warranty can arise as between parties other than parties to the main contract or the sale of the article in respect of which the warranty is alleged to have been given.... I am satisfied that, if a direct contract of purchase and sale of the paint had then been made between the plaintiffs and the defendants, the correct ... the principles stated by Sir John Holt Holt CJ in Crosse v Gardner and Medina v Staughton that an affirmation ... more details
orphan date March 2012 Infobox company company name RX PlasticsLtd company type Private Company foundation start date 1972 location city Ashburton, New Zealand Ashburton location country New Zealand industry Plastics Manufacturer and Retailer homepage http www.rxplastics.co.nz www.rxplastics.co.nz intl yes RX PlasticsLtd is New Zealand company specialising mostly in plastic products for Water transportation water transport or Water storage storage . The company was established in 1972 in Ashburton, New Zealand Ashburton , New Zealand and now has Distribution center distribution centres in North America , Australia , South America and South Africa . RX Plastics designs and manufactures the K Line Irrigation product range, parts of which are patented in New Zealand, Australia, USA , South Africa and Canada . ref cite news url http www.k linena.com title K Line Irrigation North America year 2012 publisher K Line ref K Line Irrigation RX Plastic s patented K Line technology is a unique system designed for irrigation . The system uses flexible Tube fluid conveyance tubing line and a pod Irrigation sprinkler sprinkler system. ref cite news url http www.irrigationnz.co.nz assets Uploads LORESFINALIrrigationNZ News March 2011.pdf title Irrigation New Zealand date May 2011 publisher Irrigation NZ ref The core of the system is a series of Durable good durable pods that protect a sprinkler. The sprinkler is attached to a resilient but flexible Pipe fluid conveyance polyethylene pipe . Airtech RX Plastics received a grant from Trade and Industry NZ which they used to develop their Airtech 9000 Wastewater Treatment system. This system is designed to be earthquake proof because the septic tank systems are designed to move in the soil without breaking during an earthquake. ref cite news ... earthquakes in September 2010 and February 2011, RX Plasticsproducts played an important role ... Zealand Category Plastics companies ... more details
Infobox Court Case name Phillips ProductsLtdv Hyland and Hamstead Plant Hire Co Ltd court Court of Appeal image Kettenbagger CAT 325C LN.jpeg caption date decided full name citations 1984 http www.bailii.org uk cases UKHL 1980 2.html EWCA Civ 5 , 1987 2 All ER 620 judges prior actions subsequent actions opinions Slade LJ transcripts keywords Unfair terms Phillips ProductsLtdv Hyland and Hamstead Plant Hire Co Ltd 1984 http www.bailii.org uk cases UKHL 1980 2.html EWCA Civ 5 is an English contract law case concerning the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 . Facts Hamstead Plant Hire hired out a JCB excavator to Phillips Products. It also hired out a driver, Mr Hyland. Condition 8 of their contract stated the driver would be deemed to be the employee of Phillips Products. The driver crashed into Phillips factory wall. Phillips argued that Hamstead Plant Hire should pay for the damage cause by Mr Hyland, because condition 8 was caught by UCTA 1977 section 2 2 and was unreasonable. Hamstead Plant Hire argued it was not, asserting there had been no negligence on its part that was even being excluded, because there was no breach of obligation in section 1 1 b . The effect of condition 8, they contended, was that no liability for the driver had ever been assumed. Judgment Slade LJ rejected Hamstead Plant Hire s argument. Condition 8 was caught by UCTA 1977, and was unreasonable in excluding its liability for Mr Hyland s damage. When deciding what breach there is, the court should not include the exclusion clause in deciding whether a breach existed. Read with section 13 1 , section 2 encompasses terms and notices which exclude or restrict the relevant obligation or duty , so section 2 clearly extends to duty defining, not just duty excluding clauses. Condition 8 failed the reasonableness test under section 11 and Schedule 2, because the claimants hire was for a short period, there was little ... Thompson v T Lohan Plant Hire Ltd 1987 2 All ER 631 Notes refs 2 References External links Category ... more details
. DEFAULTSORT Reckitt & Colman ProductsLtdV Borden Inc Category House of Lords cases Category ...Unreferenced stub auto yes date December 2009 Orphan date December 2009 Reckitt & Colman Ltdv Borden Inc 1990 1 All E.R. 873, &ndash also known as the Jif Lemon case &ndash is a leading decision of the House of Lords on the tort of passing off . The Court reaffirmed the three part test reputation and goodwill, misrepresentation, and damage in order to establish a Claim legal claim of passing off. Background per Jif Lemon LJ Reckitt Benckiser Reckitt , sold lemon juice under the name Jif lemon juice Jif Lemon which came in plastic yellow container that was shaped like a lemon . Borden, a competitor, started to produce lemon juice in a similar lemon shaped plastic container that was only slightly larger with a flattened side. Reckitt sued Borden for passing off their product as Jif Lemon juice. At trial the Court found in favour of Reckitt, which was subsequently upheld at the Court of Appeal of England and Wales Court of Appeal . Opinion of the Court At the House of Lords, the Court upheld the previous judgments. Lord Oliver , at page 880, reaffirmed the classic test for passing off First, he must establish a goodwill or reputation attached to the goods or services which he supplies in the mind of the purchasing public by association with the identifying get up whether it consists simply of a brand name or a trade description, or the individual features of labelling or packaging under which his particular goods or services are offered to the public, such that the get up is recognised by the public as distinctive specifically of the plaintiff s goods or services. Second, he must demonstrate a misrepresentation by the defendant to the public whether or not intentional leading or likely to lead the public to believe that goods or services offered by him are the goods or services ... Kingdom Case law stub See Also Satyam Infoway Ltd. v. Sifynet Solutions Pvt. Ltd. ... more details
Infobox Court Case name Rolled Steel Ltdv British Steel Corp court Court of Appeal image caption date decided full name citations 1985 Ch 246 judges prior actions subsequent actions opinions Browne Wilkinson LJ, Slade LJ transcripts keywords Authority, ultra vires, proper purposes Rolled Steel Products Holdings Ltdv British Steel Corp 1985 Ch 246 is a UK company law case, concerning the enforceability of obligations against a company. Facts Rolled Steel ProductsLtd gave security to guarantee the debts of a company called SSS Ltd to British Steel . This was a purpose that did not benefit Rolled Steel ProductsLtd. Moreover, Rolled Steel s director, Mr Shenkman was interested in SSS Ltd he had personally guaranteed a debt to British Steel s subsidiary David Colville & Sons Colvilles , which SSS Ltd owed money to . The company was empowered to grant guarantees under its articles but approval of the deal was irregular because Mr Shenkman s personal interest meant his vote should not have counted for the quorum at the meeting approving the guarantee. The shareholders knew of the irregularity, and so did British Steel. Rolled Steel Products wanted to get out of the guarantee, and was arguing it was unenforceable either because it was ultra vires, or because the guarantee had been created without proper authority. At first instance Vinelott J held British Steel s knowledge of the irregularity rendered the guarantee ultra vires, void and incapable of validation with the members consent ... in In re David Payne & Co Ltd 1904 2 Ch 608 and Charterbridge Corporation Ltdv Lloyds Bank Ltd ... of powers was also drawn by Oliver J in In re Halt Garage 1964 Ltd 1982 3 All ER 1016 , 1034. I consider the reasoning of the decision in In re Lee, Behrens and Co Ltd 1932 2 Ch. 46 to be wrong ... Law Directive 68 151 EEC Hartog v Colin & Shields 1939 3 All ER 566 Howard v Patent Ivory Manufacturing Co 1888 38 Ch D 156 Morris v Kanssen 1946 AC 459, a presumption of irregularity cannot be relied ... more details
Unreferenced date May 2007 Technical date November 2009 Vita Food Products Inc. v. Unus Shipping Co. Ltd. , 1939 A.C. 277 P.C. is a leading conflict of law s decision of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council on appeal from Nova Scotia . The case stands for the proposition that an express choice of law clause in a contract should be honoured as long as the agreement was bona fide and not against public policy . The case was a landmark point for contract law as it greatly expanded the ability of parties to choose the jurisdiction of their contacts. Background A shipment of herring was sent from Newfoundland separate from Canada at the time to New York, and ran aground in Nova Scotia. The bill of lading did not, however, conform to the Newfoundland Carriage of Goods by Sea Act 1932 which required that it contain an express statement that it is to have effect subject to the provisions of the Hague Conference on Private International Law Hague Rules as expressed in this Act. The bill contained a clause exempting the carrier from liability for the Captain nautical master s negligence. Under the Hague Rules such clauses were considered void. The bills stated that it was subject to the Canadian Water Carriage of Goods Act 1910 and stated that This contract shall be governed by English law. During the voyage, the ship sank off Nova Scotia due to negligence. The issue was, which law applied to the bills of lading. Decision of the Council Robert Wright, Baron Wright Lord Wright , writing for the Council, held that the proper law of the contract was England and so the Newfoundland Act did not apply and the contract was upheld. He stated the test for determining the choice of law in such circumstances. quote where there is an express statement by the parties of their intention to select the law of the contract, it is difficult to see what qualifications are possible, provided the intention expressed is bona fide and legal, and provided there is no reason for avoiding the choice ... more details
Infobox Court Case name Aveling Barford Ltdv Perion Ltd court High Court image caption date decided full name citations 1989 BCLC 626 judges prior actions subsequent actions opinions transcripts keywords Reduction of capital Aveling Barford Ltdv Perion Ltd 1989 BCLC 626 is a UK company law case concerning reduction of capital . It held that a sale at an undervalue of an asset was a dress up and unlawful reduction of capital. The proper procedure for reduction of capital is now found in CA 2006 sections 641 653. Facts Mr Lee owned and controlled both Aveling Barford Ltd and Perion Ltd. Aveling Barford had a sports ground and with it, residential planning permission, but it did not have enough money to make a distribution to its shareholders. So the property of Aveling Barford was conveyed to Perion for 350,000, when its actual resale value was 1,520,000. Aveling Barford then went into liquidation. The liquidator sued to have Perion be declared a constructive trustee of the resale proceeds price. Judgment Hoffmann J held that it was the director s duty to obtain the full value of the land for Aveling Barford, so Mr Lee was in breach of fiduciary duty . He was, therefore, accountable as a constructive trustee. Whether or not the act was approved by all shareholders was irrelevant since the company cannot return its capital to shareholders without court leave, or following the special procedure. This was a dressed up distribution , it was ultra vires and incapable of validation or ratification. Cquote The rule that capital may not be returned to shareholders is a rule for the protection of creditor s and the evasion of the rule falls within what I think Slade LJ had in mind when he spoke of fraud on creditors. See also Clist shares Clist personality UK company law CA 2006 s 845 Progress Property Co Ltdv Moorgarth Group Ltd 2010 UKSC 55 Notes refs 2 References External links Category United Kingdom company case law Category Grantham ... more details
Infobox Court Case name Chartbrook Ltdv Persimmon Homes Ltd court House of Lords image caption date decided full name citations 2009 http www.bailii.org uk cases UKHL 2009 38.html UKHL 38 , 2009 1 A.C. 1101, 2009 3 W.L.R. 267 judges prior actions 2008 EWCA Civ 183, 2008 2 All E.R. Comm 387 subsequent actions opinions Lord Hope, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Rodger, Lord Walker and Baroness Hale transcripts keywords Interpretation Chartbrook Ltdv Persimmon Homes Ltd 2009 http www.bailii.org uk cases UKHL ... v Pim ref Frederick E Rose London Ltdv William H Pim Junior & Co Ltd 1953 2 QB 450 ref document can ... Homes Ltd claimed that a contract it had to develop Chartbrook Ltd s land should be interpreted differently, so that they would be paid more. The contract said Persimmon Ltd was entitled to an Additional ... Court and Court of Appeal agreed with Chartbrook s interpretation. Persimmon Ltd appealed on the interpretation ... it contended that the rule in Prenn v Simmonds ref 1971 1 WLR 1381 ref that pre contractual ... allowed the appeal by Persimmon Ltd, and agreed that properly construed the contract should ... person would understand, following ICS v West Bromwich BS . There was no limit to the amount of red ... also held that, following Prenn v Simmonds , while a theory of objective interpretation could ... a contractual document as in BCCI v Ali ref Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA v Ali No 1 2001 UKHL 8, 2002 1 AC 251 ref it remains inadmissible because it is usually irrelevant .... ref Jones v Secretary of State for Social Services 1972 AC 944 ref While the decision of Kerr J in The Karen ... about rectification, it was noted that Joscelyne v Nissen Ref 1970 2 QB 86 ref made rectification ... carry little weight, ref Carmichael v National Power plc 1999 1 WLR 2042 and George Cohen Sons & Co Ltdv Docks and Inland Waterways Executive 1950 84 Ll L Rep. 97 considered ref though unlike a claim regarding ordinary interpretation would not be inadmissible. Here, if Persimmon Ltd had not succeeded ... more details
Infobox Court Case name Atlasview Ltdv Brightview Ltd court High Court Chancery image date decided full name citations 2004 EWHC 1056 Ch , 2004 2 BCLC 191 judges prior actions subsequent actions opinions transcripts keywords Unfair prejudice , reflective loss Atlasview Ltdv Brightview Ltd 2004 EWHC 1056 Ch is a UK company law case, which concerns a claim for unfair prejudice now s 994 Companies Act 2006 and raised the question of barring a claim if attempted to recover for reflective loss loss to the company, which also prejudices a member . The case is a notable precedent because it makes clear that a nominee shareholder is also a legitimate petitioner for unfair prejudice. ref L Sealy and S Worthington, Sealy s Cases and Materials in Company Law 9th edn OUP 2010 651 PL Davies , Gower and Davies Principles of Modern Company Law 8th edn Sweet and Maxwell 2008 683. ref Facts Brightview Ltd provided internet services. Its shares were in two classes, X and Y shares. Mr Shalson held the majority of X shares through another company called Reedbest Properties Ltd. Atlasview Ltd controlled the majority of Y shares. Unfortunately, Brightview s business had faltered after it failed to fulfill an immediate demand to repay a loan of 5.24 million from the X shareholders. An Administration law administration order was made. Shortly after, Brightview was sold to another company owned by the X shareholders. Atlasview complained that it with Y shareholders had been unfairly prejudiced under ... protection UK company law Bhullar v Bhullar O Donnell v Shanahan Referred to in judgment Attorney General v Blake 2001 1 AC 268 Re Cade J E & Son Ltd 1991 BCC 360 Re a Company No 005287 of 1985 ... 2 BCC 99,276 Re Elgindata Ltd 1991 BCLC 959 Giles v Rhind 2003 Ch 618 Re Harrison Saul D & Sons plc 1994 BCC 475 Johnson v Gore Wood & Co 2002 2 AC 1 O Neill v Phillips 1999 1 WLR 1092 Rock Nominees Ltdv RCO Holdings plc 2004 BCC 466 Three Rivers District Council v Governor and Company of the Bank ... more details
Clark v TDG Ltd t a Novacold Ltd 1999 IRLR 318 is a UK labour law case concerning the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 . Facts Mr Clark was injured at work a frozen food warehouse in Hull . He was then dismissed when an orthopaedic doctor said he did not know when he would be able to start again. Judgment Mummery LJ said the DDA drew no direct indirect discrimination distinction, and a justification defence is always available. The comparator was someone who was not disabled, and could do the work. It certainly was discrimination, but on the question of justification, no attention had been paid to the Code of Practice. Significance Some of the comments in this case are no longer good law. Since Directive 2000 78 EC, there has been an amendment to the Disability Discrimination Act so that a direct indirect distinction is introduced, and the language of the Act clarified. Lewisham LBC v Malcolm and EHRC 2008 UKHL 43, 2008 IRLR 700 expressly disapproved the decision, though Baroness Hale dissented. See also UK employment discrimination law UK labour law Human Rights Act 1998 Notes reflist 2 External links http www.hotfroguk.co.uk Companies T D G Novacold TDG Novacold s address Category United Kingdom labour case law Category United Kingdom equality case law Category Court of Appeal of England and Wales cases Category 1999 in case law Category 1999 in the United Kingdom ... more details
Scruttons Ltdv Midland Silicones Ltd 1961 http www.bailii.org uk cases UKHL 1961 4.html UKHL 4 , 1962 AC 446, is a leading House of Lords case on Privity in English law privity of contract law contract . The Court outlined an exception to the privity rule, known as the Lord Reid test , through agency law agency as it applies to sub contractors and employees seeking protection in their employers contract. Facts Scruttons Ltd was shipping a load of crates through a carrier. In the contract between the two parties there was a limitation of liability clause for 500 per box. The goods were damaged in transit due to the negligence of the stevedores. The stevedores were under contract with the shipping company which contained an exclusion clause. Midland were unaware of the relationship between the carriers and the stevedores. Judgment At first blush, it was clear to the Court that the stevedores could not be exempted by the exemption clause as there was no privity of contract . The Court looked at whether there was a bailment relationship but found none. The case turned on the application of the Elder, Dempster case which suggested that privity could be circumvented. Lord Reid proposed that the stevedores could be covered under the contractual clause through agency if certain pre conditions were satisfied. Cquote I can see a possibility of success of the agency argument if first the bill of lading makes it clear that the stevedore is intended to be protected by the provisions in it which limit liability, secondly the bill of lading makes it clear that the carrier, in addition to contracting for these provisions on his own behalf, is also contracting as agent for the stevedore that these provisions should apply to the stevedore, thirdly the carrier has authority from the stevedore ... these conditions were satisfied in the subsequent case of New Zealand Shipping Co Ltdv A M Satterthwaite & Co Ltd New Zealand Shipping v Satterthwaite The Eurymedon 1975 AC 154. Significance With the Scruttons ... more details
Infobox Court Case name Hillas & Co Ltdv Arcos Ltd court House of Lords image Timber DonnellyMills2005 SeanMcClean.jpg date decided full name citations 1932 UKHL 2, 1932 147 LT 503 HL judges Lord Wright, Lord Tomlin prior actions 1932 40 Lloyd s Rep CA subsequent actions opinions transcripts http www.bailii.org uk cases UKHL 1932 2.html Full text of decision keywords Hillas & Co Ltdv Arcos Ltd 1932 http www.bailii.org uk cases UKHL 1932 2.html UKHL 2 is a landmark House of Lords case on English contract law where the court first began to move away from a strict, literal interpretation of the terms of a contract, and instead interpreted it with a view to preserve the bargain. The Court ruled that judges may imply terms into a contract based on the past dealings of the parties rather than void the agreement. Lord Wright stated in this case that people who give good consideration can bind themselves to a duty to negotiate in good faith, though this was controversially rejected in the later House of Lords case, Walford v Miles . ref 1992 2 AC 128 ref Facts Arcos agreed to supply Hillas with lumber in a contract stating the sale of 22,000 standards of softwood of fair specification . In the contract there was an option to purchase additional 100,000 standards of lumber. The only terms of the option stated, blockquote whatever the conditions are, buyers shall obtain the goods on conditions and at prices which show to them a reduction of 5 per cent on the f.o.b. value of the official price list at any time ruling during 1931. blockquote Hillas tried to exercise the option but Arcos ... J of the Court of Appeal followed the rule set out in the case of May v Butcher which stated ... he would not have to sell the 100,000 units at a loss. See also Clist enforceability Smith v Hughes 1871 LR 6 QB 597 Hartog v Colin & Shields 1939 3 All ER 566 Frederick E Rose London Ltdv William H Pim Junior & Co Ltd 1953 2 QB 450 Notes reflist 2 External links http www.bailii.org uk cases UKHL ... more details
Infobox company name V Guard Industries Ltd logo caption type traded as nse VGUARD fate predecessor successor foundation 1977 founder Kochouseph Chittilappilly defunct End date YYYY MM DD location city Kochi location country India location locations area served key people industry products Electrical Appliances services revenue operating income net income assets equity owner num employees parent divisions subsid Wonderla , Veegaland homepage URL vguard.in footnotes intl V Guard Industries Ltd is a major electrical appliances manufacturer in India , and the largest in the state of Kerala with an annual turnover of INR 7 billion. ref http www.thehindu.com todays paper tp sports article1684401.ece The Hindu. V Guard turnover. ref ref http www.thehindu.com todays paper tp sports article2297708.ece The Hindu. V Guard registers increase in profit . ref It manufactures Voltage regulator voltage stabilizer s, wiring cables , electric pump s, electric motors , Water heating geysers , solar water heaters, electric fans and Uninterruptible power supply UPS s. It was founded in 1977 by Kochouseph Chittilappilly as a small voltage stabilizer manufacturing unit. V Guard Industries is also a holding company for other establishments such as Wonderla and Veegaland , amusement parks. ref http www.vguard.in about voltage stabilizers water pumps V Guard Industries Official Website. ref ref http www.thehindubusinessline.com features investment world stock insight article2580221.ece The Hindu BusinessLine. Stock Insight V Guard Industries. ref References Reflist india company stub Category Economy of Kerala Category Companies based in Kerala ... more details
Wiktionarypar LTDLTD , Ltd , or Ltd. may refer to toc right Business and finance Ltd. or Ltd, denotes a business incorporated under the laws of England, Wales, Scotland, Canada, other Commonwealth countries, the Republic of Ireland, Cyprus, Israel and some Anglophone countries in Africa, like Ghana or Nigeria. Limited company Private company limited by shares Long term debt, also long term liabilities, a position of the Long Term Disability, replacement benefits for employees who are not able to work, see Work life balance United States Short and long term disability Work life balance United States , section Short and long term disability LTD, the NYSE symbol for Limited Brands , Inc. Science, technology, and biology Lethal Trap Device, used to ensure pest animals are not left live in traps for unreasonable periods Light travel distance, a Distance measures cosmology cosmological distance measure Low Temperature Difference engine, a heat engine that operates by cyclic compression and expansion of air or other gas, see Stirling engine Laser target designator , a laser light source which is used to illuminate a target Linear Transformer Driver , a torus shaped parallel connection of switch capacitor units, designed to deliver rapid high power pulses Long term depression , neurophysiology , a long lasting weakening in signal transmission between neurons Television, film, and music LTD Buck Tick album LTD Buck Tick album , a 1998 album by Buck Tick L.T.D. Love, Togetherness and Devotion , a 1970s funk music group Living the Dream TV series Living the Dream TV series , a New Zealand TV series Transportation Ford LTD disambiguation , two vehicles made by the Ford Motor Company Lane Transit District , a public transportation agency in Lane County, Oregon, U.S. Other uses Leeds Thomas Danby , a further education college in Leeds, West Yorkshire, England LTD Guitars , a midrange ... de Ltd fr LTD it LTD ja LTD ... more details
Infobox Court Case name Rigby v Ferodo Ltd court House of Lords image caption date decided full name citations 1988 ICR 29 judges Lord Bridge, Lord Fraser, Lord Brightman, Lord Ackner and Lord Oliver. prior actions subsequent actions opinions transcripts keywords Employment contract Rigby v Ferodo Ltd 1988 ICR 29 is a UK labour law case concerning the contract of employment . It held that if an employer reduces wages without a worker s consent, the worker may continue to work and claim the shortfall. Facts Ferodo Ltd cut wages by 5 to stay afloat. The trade union agreed not to strike. Mr Rigby, who worked as a lathe operator on 129 a week with a contract terminable on 12 weeks notice, made it known he did not accept the wage reduction. For him this was approximately 30 a week. He continued to work and after over a year, he claimed for shortfall. The judge held there was a unilateral variation of the contract, which amounted to a breach, and so Mr Rigby was entitled to damages. The Court of Appeal agreed. Ferodo Ltd appealed to the House of Lords. Judgment The House of Lords held that there had been a repudiatory breach of contract by the employer and so Mr Rigby was entitled to claim his shortfall in wages. If the employee continued to work, this did not necessarily imply he accepted the change, nor was it the case that the contract was automatically brought to an end. Moreover because Ferodo Ltd had not in fact terminated the contract the damages that Mr Rigby received could be beyond the 12 week notice period in which the contract could legitimately have been terminated, and a notice of unilateral variation could not be implicitly construed as giving notice of termination. See also Clist employment contract UK labour law Employment contract in English law Autoclenz Ltdv Belcher 2011 http www.bailii.org uk cases UKSC 2011 41.html UKSC 41 Notes refs 2 References External links Category United Kingdom labour case law Category House of Lords cases Category 1988 in case ... more details
Infobox Court Case name ICI Ltdv Shatwell court House of Lords image caption date decided full name citations 1965 AC 656 judges prior actions subsequent actions opinions transcripts keywords Volenti non fit injuria ICI Ltdv Shatwell 1965 AC 656 is a UK labour law case concerning Facts Two shot firing brothers were injured because they could not be bothered to take the mandatory precautions. Judgment Lord Denning MR held that they were not entitled to compensation. See also Clist unfair dismissal UK labour law Unfair dismissal Notes refs 2 References External links Category United Kingdom labour case law Category House of Lords cases Category 1965 in case law Category 1965 in the United Kingdom ... more details
Infobox Court Case name OBG Ltdv Allan court House of Lords image date decided full name citations 2007 UKHL 21, 2008 1 AC 1, 2007 2 WLR 920 judges Lord Hoffmann, Lord Nicholls, Lord Walker, Baroness Hale and Lord Brown prior actions 2005 EWCA Civ 106, 2005 QB 762 subsequent actions opinions transcripts keywords Economic tort, interference with a contract OBG Ltdv Allan 2007 http www.bailii.org uk cases UKHL 2007 21.html UKHL 21 was a combined appeal with Douglas v Hello Ltd and Mainstream Properties Ltdv Young and stands as the leading case on economic torts in English law . Facts Lord Hoffmann in his judgment summarised the facts. Cquote In OBG Ltdv Allan 2005 QB 762 the defendants were receivers purportedly appointed under a floating charge which is admitted to have been invalid. Acting in good faith, they took control of the claimant company s assets and undertaking. The claimant says that this was not only a trespass to its land and a conversion law conversion of its chattels but also the tort of unlawful interference with its contractual relations. It claims that the defendants are liable in damages for the value of the assets and undertaking, including the value of the contractual claims, as at the date of their appointment. Alternatively, it says the defendants are liable for the same damages in conversion. In Douglas v Hello Ltd 2006 QB 125 the magazine OK contracted for the exclusive right to publish photographs of a celebrity wedding at which all other photography would be forbidden. The rival magazine Hello published photographs which it knew to have been surreptitiously taken by an unauthorised photographer pretending to be a waiter or guest. OK says that this was interference ... Ltdv Young 2005 IRLR 964 two employees of a property company, in breach of their contracts, diverted ... and 202 . ref See also Economic torts in English law Conversion law Torquay Hotel Co Ltdv Cousins ... ldjudgmt jd070502 obg 1.htm House of Lords judgments page DEFAULTSORT Obg LtdV Allan Category ... more details
Infobox Court Case name Hogg v Cramphorn Ltd court High Court image caption date decided full name citations 1967 Ch 254 judges prior actions subsequent actions opinions Buckley J transcripts keywords Takeover, proper purpose Hogg v Cramphorn Ltd 1967 Ch 254 is a famous UK company law case on the director liability. The Court held that Board of directors corporate directors who dilute the value of the stock in order to prevent a hostile takeover the poison pill are breaching their fiduciary duty to the company . Facts Mr Baxter approached the board of directors of Cramphorn Ltd. to make a takeover offer for the company. The directors including Colonel Cramphorn who was managing director and chairman believed that the takeover would be bad for the company. So they issued 5707 shares with ten votes each to the trustees of the employee s welfare scheme Cramphorn, an employee and the auditor . This meant they could outvote Hogg s bid for majority control. A shareholder, Mr Hogg, sued, alleging the issue of the shares was ultra vires . Cramphorn argued that the directors actions were all in good faith. It was feared that Mr Baxter would sack many of the workers. Judgment Buckley J, writing for the Court, held that the new shares issued by the directors are invalid. The directors violated their duties as directors by issuing shares for the purpose of preventing the takeover. The power to issue shares creates a fiduciary duty and must only be exercised in order to raise capital and not for any other purposes such as to prevent a takeover. The act could not be justified on the basis that the directors honestly believed that it would be in the best interest of the company. The improper ... meeting , with no votes allowed to the newly issued shares. See also Clist takeovers Cheff v. Mathes , 199 A.2d 548 Del. 1964 Howard Smith Ltdv Ampol Ltd 1974 AC 832. Criterion Properties plc v Stratford UK Properties LLC 2004 UKHL 28 Notes refs 2 References Brudney, Fiduciary Ideology in Transactions ... more details
Infobox Court Case name Weathersfield Ltdv Sargeant court Court of Appeal of England and Wales image caption date decided 10 December 1998 full name citations 1998 http www.bailii.org ew cases EWCA Civ 1998 1938.html EWCA Civ 1938 , 1999 ICR 425, 1999 Disc LR 290, 1999 IRLR 94 judges Beldam LJ, Swinton Thomas LJ and Pill LJ prior actions subsequent actions opinions transcripts keywords Weathersfield Ltdv Sargeant 1999 IRLR 94 is a UK labour law concerning the scope of race discrimination. Facts Mrs Sargeant got a job at Weathersfield, a car hire company. She was told, we do have a special policy regarding coloured and Asians. We have got to be careful who we hire the vehicles to. If you get a telephone call from any coloured or Asians you can usually tell them by the sound of their voice. You have to tell them that there are no vehicles available. She was appalled, and she resigned. She claimed constructive unfair dismissal for race discrimination. The question was, although she was not herself black, was the treatment she has on grounds of race? Judgment It was held that she could claim. In the Race Relations Act 1976 it says, A person discriminates against another in any circumstances relevant for the purposes of any provision of this Act if a on racial grounds he treats that other less favourably than he treats or would treat other persons . Although Mrs Sargeant was not herself coloured or Asian, the foul conduct of the employer was still on racial grounds . See also Wilson v TB Steelwork Co Ltd ET Case no. 23662 77 A white woman won a race discrimination claim after being refused a job because her husband was black. UK employment discrimination law UK labour law Notes reflist 2 External links Category United Kingdom labour case law Category Discrimination law in the United Kingdom Category Court of Appeal of England and Wales cases Category 1998 in case law Category 1998 in the United Kingdom ... more details
Infobox Court Case name Phillips v Brooks ltd court image Pink sapphire ring.jpg date decided 1 May 1919 full name citations 1919 2 KB 243 judges Horridge J prior actions subsequent actions opinions transcripts keywords Fraudulent misrepresentation , mistake about identity, third party rights Phillips v Daniel Ltd 1919 2 KB 243 is an English contract law case concerning Misrepresentation in English law misrepresentation . It held that a person is deemed to contract with the person in front of them, and that if a third party s rights intervene, rescission for misrepresentation will be precluded. Facts On 15 April 1918, a man named Mr North entered Phillip s jewellery shop and said I am Sir George Bullough . He wrote a dud cheque for 3000 to pay for some pearls and a ring. He said he lived in St James Square . Mr Phillips checked the phone directory, and found there was someone there by that name. Mr Phillips asked if he d like to take the jewellery with him. Mr North said he would leave the pearls but take the ring for his wife s birthday tomorrow . Mr North pledged the ring to Brooks Ltd for 350. The cheque was dishonoured. Mr Phillips sued Brooks Ltd to get the ring back. Note that there are conflicting reports, showing that Mr North only identified himself after the ring was sold, as Viscount Haldane said in Lake v Simmons , but others say that North identified himself straight away. Judgment The earlier judgement of Cundy v Lindsay had established that contracts could be automatically void for mistake to identity . Where this is the case, Title property title does not pass to the fraudulent buyer, and the third party loses out in the entirety. This principle is different where parties contract face to face Horridge J stated cquote I have carefully considered the evidence ... in English law Mistakes in English law Nemo dat quod non habet Cundy v Lindsay Ingram v Little Shogun Finance Ltdv Hudson Notes reflist 2 Category English contract case law Category English ... more details
Infobox Court Case name Wheeler v Saunders Ltd court Court of Appeal of England and Wales image date decided 19 December 1994 full name Dr. Graham Edward Wheeler v J.J. Saunders Ltd citations 1994 EWCA Civ 32 judges Christopher Staughton Staughton LJ br Peter Gibson judge Gibson LJ br John May judge Sir John May prior actions High Court of Justice subsequent actions opinions transcripts http www.bailii.org ew cases EWCA Civ 1994 32.html Bailii transcript keywords Wheeler v Saunders Ltd case citation 1994 EWCA Civ 32 is an English Court of Appeal of England and Wales Court of Appeal case on Nuisance in English law nuisance which amended the precedent set by Gillingham Borough Council v Medway Chatham Dock Co Ltd . ref 1993 QB 343 ref Wheeler was a veterinary surgeon who owned Kingdown Farm House the wider farm was owned by J.J. Saunders Ltd, who used it for raising pigs. After Saunders gained planning permission for a pair of pig houses, Wheeler brought an action in nuisance, alleging that the smell of the pigs interfered with his use and enjoyment of the land. When the case went to the Court of Appeal, Saunders argued that the granting of planning permission for the pig houses had changed the nature of the area, as in Gillingham , making the nuisance permissible. The Court of Appeal rejected this argument, holding that a pair of pig houses was not a sufficient development to change the nature of an area the centre of the Gillingham case had been a commercial dock, which was a sufficient development. Facts Wheeler was a veterinary surgeon who owned Kingdown Farm House, near, Priddy with his wife. The farm itself belonged to Kingdown Farm Limited, a company 15 percent owned by Wheeler and 85 percent owned by J.J. Saunders Ltd. The two fell out by March 1988, with Wheeler dismissed ... Borough Council v Medway Chatham Dock Co Ltd , ref 1993 QB 343 ref where it was held that the granting ... was based on the case of Wheeldon v Burrows , where Alfred Thesiger Thesiger LJ said ... more details
for the final appeal in the House of Lords OBG Ltdv Allan Infobox Court Case name Douglas v Hello Ltd court Court of Appeal image Catherine Zeta Jones Cannes.jpg date decided full name citations 2005 http www.bailii.org ew cases EWCA Civ 2005 595.html EWCA Civ 595 , 2006 QB 125 judges Lord Phillips MR, Clarke LJ Neuberger LJ prior actions subsequent actions opinions transcripts keywords Privacy, economic tort Douglas v Hello Ltd 2005 http www.bailii.org ew cases EWCA Civ 2005 595.html EWCA Civ 595 was a series of cases in which Michael Douglas and Catherine Zeta Jones challenged unauthorized photos of their wedding. ref http www.law.ed.ac.uk ahrc personality ukcases.asp Hello Personality Database Bot generated title ref The case resulted in OK Magazine being awarded 1,033,156. Facts Michael Douglas and Catherine Zeta Jones agreed a deal with OK Magazine which would give the company exclusivity over their wedding which took place in 2000 at the Plaza Hotel in New York. According to the deal the couple were to approve the selection of photographs used by OK Magazine . In order to ensure the exclusivity there was strict security of the event and no guests were allowed to take photographs ... had been to the detriment of OK magazine. See OBG Ltdv Allan . See also Privacy in English law Notes reflist External links http www.11kbw.com articles docs DouglasvHellotalkPN.pdf Douglas v ...?name .. articles Douglas 20v 20Hello.htm Douglas v. Hello Case Watch Law Articles and News ... ahrc script ed vol4 2 editorial.asp Douglas v Hello An OK result Bot generated title ref Judgments Douglas v Hello 2001 In Douglas v Hello No 1 2001 2 WLR 992 the Douglases attempted to gain an injunction ... at a wedding with 250 guests. Douglas v Hello 2003 In Douglas v Hello No 2 2003 EWHC 786 Ch OK magazine and the Douglases were successful in claiming for breach of confidence against Hello Ltd. as the company ... title ref Douglas v Hello 2005 The Judge Lindsay J upheld the Douglases claim to confidence. Hello ... more details
Refimprove date September 2010 Infobox musical artist See Wikipedia WikiProject Musicians name L.T.D. image caption image size background group or band alias origin Greensboro, North Carolina instrument ... Richard Moorings br Kermit Singleton br Howard Johnson notable instruments L.T.D. is an United States ... ballads, such as Love Ballad L.T.D. song Love Ballad , We Both Deserve Each Other s Love, and Where Did We Go Wrong? Career L.T.D. which stands for Love, Togetherness, and Devotion , was formed in Greensboro ... Keyboard instrument keyboards , vocals , formed their own band named Love Men Ltd. Then they drove ... and Robert Santiel congas, percussion joined them. 1974 found them signing with A&M Records as L.T.D. ... on to produce songs such as Love Ballad L.T.D. song Love Ballad , Every Time I Turn Around Back ... career and L.T.D. stayed busy in the music industry by recording for small independent record labels, and doing their own personal music projects. In 1999, a L.T.D. copycat band lost a federal court battle with the current 3 original members of L.T.D. retaining the rights, and ownership of the name L.T.D. The three original members, Arthur Lorenzo Carnegie saxes,flute, guitar,vocals , Carle Wayne ... yes title L.T.D. US albums chart history publisher allmusic.com accessdate 2010 02 06 ref rowspan ... SEARCH RESULTS&artist L.T.D.&format Album&go Search&perPage 25 title L.T.D. US certification history ... 1 2000 align left The Millennium Collection The Best of L.T.D. &mdash &mdash align center colspan 7 ... class artist id p4713 pure url yes title L.T.D. US singles chart history publisher allmusic.com ... Chart UK ref name chartstats cite web url http www.chartstats.com artistinfo.php?id 2997 title L.T.D. ... align left rowspan 1 Non album single rowspan 1 1976 align left Love Ballad L.T.D. song Love Ballad ... References Reflist External links http www.4realltd.com L.T.D. official website myspace id ltdlovetogethernessanddevotion name L.T.D. Allmusic class artist id p4713 L.T.D. Category A&M Records artists ... more details
Infobox Court Case name Autoclenz Ltdv Belcher court Supreme Court of the United Kingdom image caption date decided 27 July 2011 full name citations 2011 http www.bailii.org uk cases UKSC 2011 41.html UKSC 41 judges Lord Hope, Lord Walker, Lord Collins, Lord Clarke and Lord Wilson prior actions 2008 http www.bailii.org ew cases EWCA Civ 2008 1172.html EWCA Civ 1046 , 2010 IRLR 70 subsequent actions opinions Lord Clarke transcripts Full transcript of http www.supremecourt.gov.uk docs UKSC 2009 0198 Judgment.pdf judgment and http www.supremecourt.gov.uk docs UKSC 2009 0198 ps.pdf press summary keywords Contract of employment Autoclenz Ltdv Belcher 2011 http www.bailii.org uk cases UKSC 2011 41.html ... the decision of the Court of Appeal in Consistent Group Ltdv Kalwak . The company appealed against ... minimum to produce a contract of employment Nethermere St Neots Ltdv Gardiner 1984 ICR 612 ... of bargaining power . The judgment of Rimer LJ, in Consistent Group Ltdv Kalwak , suggesting that contractual ... is found in the judgment of MacKenna J in Ready Mixed Concrete South East Ltdv Minister of Pensions ... i As Stephenson LJ put it in Nethermere St Neots Ltdv Gardiner 1984 ICR 612, 623, There must be an irreducible ... with employee status Express & Echo Publications Ltdv Tanton Tanton 1999 ICR 693, per Peter Gibson ... L Estrange v F Graucob Ltd 1934 2 KB 394. If a party has not signed a contract, then there are the usual ... Hoffmann, 48 to 66 , in Chartbrook Ltdv Persimmon Homes Ltd 2009 UKHL 38, 2009 1 AC 1101 with whom ... Ltd in Measham , Derbyshire . Autoclenz Ltd had contracted with British Car Auctions Ltd BCA to provide ... except for a few weeks working for a competitor in 2002 and 2003. In 2007 Autoclenz Ltd invited ... in English law UK labour law EU labour law US labor law German labour law R v Foster 1952 HCA 10 1952 85 C.L.R. 138 Amalgamated Investment & Property Co Ltdv Texas Commerce International Bank Ltd 1982 QB 84 Notes refs 2 References AL Bogg, Sham self employment in the Court of Appeal 2010 126 ... more details
Encyclopedia
top
