Ultra Vires Essay

On the one hand it is evident that terms implied at common law can be ‘implied in law’ or ‘implied in fact’. Terms implied as a matter of fact are said to give effect to unexpressed intentions of the

The court observed that the ‘legal meaning’, i.e. meaning the legislature is taken to have intended, may not correspond to the literal or grammatical meaning. As four justices put

The Court ruled in favor of the appellant, and the decision is described as follows:

Analyze Luxford & Anor v Sidhu & 3 others [2007] NSWSC 1356 (3 December 2007) as follows:

Case Comment: John Michael Malins v Solicitors Regulation Authority [2017] EWHC 835 (Admin) 2017 WL 01339062

Hedley Byrne & Co LTD v Heller and Partners LTD [1963] 2 All ER 5

Conversely, other judges have found the judgement in Consul Development v DPC to be inconclusive, adopting a narrow interpretation of the judgement of Stephen J and restricting the requisite knowledge only to the first three categories of the Baden scale. This tendency toward a narrow approach increased following the decision in Royal Brunei Airlines Sdn Bhd v Tan (‘Royal Brunei’) as courts attempted to reconcile the UK and Australian lines of authority. However in other cases, such as Gertsch v Atsas it was held that that the acceptance of the first four Baden categories was synonymous with accepting a standard of honesty.

(b) R v Secretary of State for Transport, ex p Factortame Ltd (No.1) [1990] AC 85 and (No.2) [1991] 1 AC 603

This essay will examine the doctrine of Judicial precedent that helps form the English Legal System. It will illustrate various views that have been raised by Judges and relating cases to the use of ‘Stare decisis’ when creating precedents. In addition it will discuss how the developments in the powers of the courts now also allow them to depart from these precedents to an extent.

The impact of Williams v Roffey Bros & Nicholls (Contractors) Ltd [1989] EWCA Civ 5 on the doctrine of consideration.

evidence with regard to the issue. The Supreme Court believed the respondent was denied due

Contractual agreements are supposed to be consensual, and freely entered into by the parties involved. Therefore, ‘before a court enforces a relationship as a contract, the courts must have a reasonably certain basis in fact to justify binding the parties to each other.’ (St. John’s Law Scholarship Repository, no date). Resolution of whether a contract was intended to be legally binding is not determined by what the parties themselves thought or intended. Rather, a more objective stance is taken by the courts. This is known as the objective theory of contract, and essentially enables ‘the courts to look at external evidence (what the parties said and did at the time)’ (Poole, 2006, p. 34), as to objectively indicate the parties’ intentions

John Rylands and Thomas Fletcher (R v Fletcher), L.R 3 H.L. 330 (House of Lords 1868).

The judges in the lower courts are bound to follow previous decision of the higher courts. It is an essential component of the common law as it is important of adequate law reporting. It is a decision of the court used as a source for future decision-making.

The leading case for this doctrine is between Salomon v A Salomon & Co in 1897. Salomon was a sole