- UHRA Home
- Browsing by Author
Browsing by Author "Monaghan, Christopher"
Now showing items 1-7 of 7
-
Discounting Fiscal Privilege - A More Charitable Solution to the Public Benefit Question : Lord MacDermott's Dissent in Oppenheim v Tobacco Securities Trust Co. Ltd [1951] AC 297
Geach, Neal; Dugdale, Tara (Wildy, Simmons and Hill, 2012) -
Dissenting Judgments in the Law
Geach, Neal; Monaghan, Christopher; Law; Office of the Vice-Chancellor; Centre for Future Societies Research; Centre for Learning, Access and Student Success (Wildy, Simmons and Hill, 2012)In this text an expert law team of contributors re-examine nineteen cases deriving from differing areas of law. These each potentially could have influenced how law developed, to drastically varied directions. These cases ... -
Do Corporations Have an Immortal Part? The Need to Prove Damage in Corporate Libel : Baroness Hale's Dissent in Jameel v Wall Street Journal Sprl [2006] UKHL 44
Geach, Neal (Wildy, Simmons and Hill, 2012)Argues that the opinion of Baroness Hale in the case of Jameel v Wall Street Journal Sprl [2006] UKHL 44 should have prevailed in the case so that corporations have to prove special damage, or the likelihood of it occurring, ... -
The Nuisance of the Proprietary Interest : Lord Cooke's Dissent in Hunter v Canary Wharf Ltd [1997] AC 655
Geach, Neal (Wildy, Simmons and Hill, 2012)Argues why the dissenting opinion on Lord Cooke in the case of Hunter was preferable to the majority's decision. The chapter also argues how the tort of nuisance could develop in order to take full account of the impact ... -
Re-establishing the Search for Principle : Lord Goff's Dissent in White v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police [1999] 2 AC 455
Geach, Neal (Wildy, Simmons and Hill, 2012)Argues that the majority's decision, whilst understandable on the facts and in light of the context of the case, was at odds with authority. Further it is argued that the dissenting opinion of Lord Goff would have restored ... -
Removal of Directors
Ma, Fang Fang (Wildy, Simmonds & Hill Publishing, 2012) -
Three Generations of Imbeciles are Enough’ The Eugenics Case and Justice Butler’s Silent Dissent: Buck v Bell 274 US 200 (1927)
Wild, Charles; Weinstein, Stuart (Wildy, Simmonds & Hill Publishing, 2012-02-01)