185:. Mr Sandford was entrusted to look after this property until the child matured. But before then, the lease expired. The landlord had told Mr Sandford that he did not want the child to have the renewed lease. There was clear evidence of the refusal to renew for the benefit of the infant. Yet the landlord was happy (apparently) to give Mr Sandford the opportunity of the lease instead. Mr Sandford took it. When the child (now Mr Keech) grew up, he sued Mr Sandford for the profit that he had been making by getting the market's lease.
42:
2329:
2343:
212:
226:
not in the least relaxed; for it is very obvious what would be the consequence of letting trustees have the lease, on refusal to renew to cestui que use. So decreed, that the lease should be assigned to the infant, and that the trustee should be indemnified from any covenants comprised in the lease, and an account of the profits made since the renewal.
279:
has reached beyond the duties of trustees, into the fiduciary duties of company directors. The approach being taken in
England (c.f. the position in Delaware corporate law) is that any possibility of a conflict of interest means a breach of trust - unless the beneficiary of the trust consented to the
189:
A person being possessed of a lease of … a market, devised his estate to trustee in trust for the infant; before the expiration of the term the trustee applied to the lessor for a renewal for the benefit of the infant, which he refused, … there was clear proof of the refusal to renew for the benefit
225:
use; though I do not say there is a fraud in this case, yet should rather have let it run out, than to have had the lease to himself. This may seem hard, that the trustee is the only person of all mankind who might not have the lease: but it is very proper that rule should be strictly pursued, and
159:
who was tried and found guilty in 1725 for accepting bribes and speculating with and losing client money in the South Sea crash. Lord
Macclesfield had, probably not coincidentally, previously held that a fiduciary was entitled to take money from a trust, invest it on their own behalf, and keep the
164:
reversed this, and the law in
England and the UK has maintained a strict opposition to any possibility of a conflict of interest ever since. The remedy of granting a constructive trust over property, and the strict approach that all possibility of a conflict of interest was to be avoided, derived
961:
AC 44 at 51–52, per Lord
Herschell, the no possibility of conflict rule is "based upon the consideration that, human nature being what it is, there is danger of the person holding a fiduciary position being swayed by interest rather than
239:. Lord King LC was worried that trustees might exploit opportunities to use trust property for themselves instead of looking after it. Business speculators using trusts had just recently caused a
221:
I must consider this as a trust for the infant, for I very well see, if a trustee, on the refusal to renew, might have a lease to himself, few trust-estates would be renewed to the
598:
1031:
868:
262:
880:
309:
268:
733:
473:
256:
982:
856:
376:
810:
2383:
2310:
688:
156:
586:
502:
302:
750:
610:
726:
538:
490:
466:
2408:
1736:
1294:
1193:
17:
2398:
1850:
1719:
845:
295:
2305:
1652:
1553:
966:
562:
2403:
1812:
1446:
719:
459:
1165:
2393:
1972:
1451:
822:
1967:
917:
1942:
1441:
204:
2388:
2025:
1123:
J Getzler, 'Rumford Market and the
Genesis of Fiduciary Obligation' in A Burrows and A Rodger (eds),
660:
622:
141:. It holds that a trustee owes a strict duty of loyalty so that there can never be a possibility of
1820:
1802:
550:
2154:
2195:
1982:
1471:
1456:
1002:
244:
2250:
2235:
927:
243:. Strict duties for trustees made their way into company law and were applied to directors and
945:(1874–75) LR 10 Ch App 96, per James LJ that the rule is necessary for "the safety of mankind"
2354:
1947:
1625:
1436:
634:
2075:
1421:
896:
236:
215:
145:
134:
8:
2230:
1370:
1287:
933:
834:
762:
711:
678:
650:
2045:
1704:
1558:
1543:
1521:
1265:
1245:
1198:
1188:
1045:
922:
786:
664:
442:
342:
122:
79:
69:
2030:
1952:
1790:
1533:
1528:
1481:
1406:
1400:
1240:
1158:
1050:
1010:
974:
798:
674:
646:
514:
402:
390:
118:
2035:
2002:
1501:
1365:
1360:
1325:
941:
892:
692:
574:
426:
364:
240:
152:
2284:
2257:
2245:
2225:
2159:
2137:
2117:
2112:
2092:
1957:
1937:
1932:
1835:
1795:
1506:
1431:
1355:
1340:
1260:
414:
326:
200:
41:
2361:
2169:
2087:
1676:
1642:
1593:
1578:
1350:
1255:
1235:
1225:
995:
912:
702:
438:
178:
2377:
2215:
2174:
2060:
2040:
2012:
1962:
1927:
1901:
1896:
1889:
1840:
1780:
1620:
1610:
1568:
1491:
1486:
1416:
1375:
1299:
990:
907:
2347:
2097:
2065:
2020:
1758:
1753:
1724:
1637:
1615:
1583:
1516:
1496:
1390:
1330:
1320:
1272:
1230:
1208:
1151:
526:
155:. Lord King LC, who decided the case, replaced the former Lord Chancellor,
151:
The case's importance derives partly from its historical context, with the
94:
2269:
2210:
2200:
1997:
1992:
1830:
1731:
1647:
1606:
1573:
1538:
1461:
1385:
1335:
1250:
1117:
S Cretney, 'The
Rationale of Keech v. Sandford' (1969) 33 Conveyancer 161
957:
949:
352:
235:
Mr
Sandford was meant to be trusted, but he put himself in a position of
138:
1120:
DR Paling, 'The
Pleadings in Keech v Sandford' (1972) 36 Conveyancer 159
287:
2333:
2262:
2142:
2080:
1825:
1746:
1741:
1699:
1681:
1669:
1630:
1476:
1466:
1426:
1411:
1395:
1345:
1282:
1277:
222:
451:
2240:
2205:
2147:
2122:
1987:
1884:
1872:
1857:
1845:
1773:
1691:
1664:
1548:
126:
2328:
250:
The principle of strict and absolute duties of loyalty laid down in
2289:
2274:
1977:
1862:
1659:
1203:
2179:
2127:
2107:
2055:
1867:
1785:
1601:
1563:
1511:
190:
of the infant, on which the trustee sets a lease made to himself.
2279:
2132:
1877:
1768:
1763:
1709:
1380:
182:
130:
211:
2220:
2164:
2070:
1911:
1714:
1213:
174:
2102:
2050:
1906:
1304:
1220:
207:
ordered Mr
Sandford should disgorge his profits. He wrote,
994:(1978) 68 Cr App R 183, information is not property under
1174:
741:
1143:
106:
Strict liability, fiduciary duty, conflict of interest
1134:
reconsidered' (2010) 69(2) Cambridge Law
Journal 287
254:was a decisive break with prior case law, seen in
68:(1726) Sel Cas Ch 61, 25 ER 223, All ER Rep 230
2375:
1125:Mapping the Law: Essays in Memory of Peter Birks
1159:
727:
467:
303:
160:profit, if they restored money to the trust.
983:Industrial Development Consultants v Cooley
1166:
1152:
734:
720:
474:
460:
378:Bristol and West Building Society v Mothew
310:
296:
40:
689:Eclairs Group Ltd v JKX Oil & Gas plc
317:
133:and has affected much of the thinking on
2311:History of the American legal profession
210:
129:duty of loyalty. It concerns the law of
857:In re Walt Disney Derivative Litigation
481:
157:Thomas Parker, 1st Earl of Macclesfield
14:
2376:
587:Howard Smith Ltd v Ampol Petroleum Ltd
503:Aberdeen Railway Co v Blaikie Brothers
165:from the general outrage at the time.
121:is a foundational case, deriving from
1147:
1130:AD Hicks, 'The remedial principle of
869:In re Citigroup Derivative Litigation
715:
455:
291:
811:Broz v. Cellular Information Systems
611:Re Sevenoaks Stationers (Retail) Ltd
539:Re City Equitable Fire Insurance Co
491:The Charitable Corporation v Sutton
24:
25:
2420:
1295:Restitution and unjust enrichment
2342:
2341:
2327:
846:Delaware General Corporation Law
751:AP Smith Manufacturing v. Barlow
2384:United Kingdom company case law
2306:History of the legal profession
967:Regal (Hastings) Ltd v Gulliver
563:Regal (Hastings) Ltd v Gulliver
230:
80:Full text of judgment on Bailii
1099:
1090:
1081:
1069:
1057:
1038:
1024:
599:Re Lo-Line Electric Motors Ltd
13:
1:
1138:Queensland Mines Ltd v Hudson
1111:
1078:(1726) Sel Cas. Ch.61, at 175
937:(1747) 1 Ves Sen 9; 27 ER 856
823:The Charitable Corp v Sutton
742:Sources on directors' duties
7:
918:United States corporate law
283:
194:
10:
2425:
1973:International legal theory
1452:International slavery laws
1447:International human rights
1442:International criminal law
173:A child had inherited the
2321:
2298:
2188:
2026:Administration of justice
2011:
1920:
1811:
1690:
1592:
1313:
1181:
889:
877:
865:
853:
843:
831:
819:
807:
795:
783:
771:
759:
747:
699:
685:
671:
661:CMS Dolphin Ltd v Simonet
657:
643:
631:
619:
607:
595:
583:
571:
559:
547:
535:
523:
511:
499:
487:
435:
423:
411:
399:
387:
373:
361:
349:
335:
323:
105:
100:
90:
85:
75:
64:
56:
48:
39:
34:
2409:Exchequer of Pleas cases
1803:Basic structure doctrine
1653:Natural and legal rights
1534:Public international law
1018:
1014:EWCA Civ 424; 2 BCLC 241
551:Re Smith and Fawcett Ltd
245:chief executive officers
168:
2399:English trusts case law
1983:Principle of typicality
1457:International trade law
1173:
1003:Guinness plc v Saunders
119:[1726] EWHC J76
27:English trusts law case
928:Business judgment rule
802:, 5 A2d 503 (Del 1939)
790:, 164 NE 545 (NY 1928)
766:, 237 NE 2d 776 (1968)
623:Re D’Jan of London Ltd
394:, 164 NE 545 (NY 1928)
228:
218:
192:
2404:1726 in Great Britain
1978:Principle of legality
1737:Delegated legislation
1437:Intellectual property
1087:(1670) 1 Ch. Cas. 190
1032:Bromfield v Wytherley
754:39 ALR 2d 1179 (1953)
635:Re Barings plc (No 5)
318:Duty of loyalty cases
214:
209:
187:
2196:Barristers' chambers
2138:Legal representation
2076:Justice of the peace
1422:Financial regulation
860:, 825 A2d 275 (2003)
814:, 637 A2d 148 (1996)
506:(1854) 1 Macq HL 461
237:conflict of interest
216:Lord Chancellor King
146:conflict of interest
2394:1726 in British law
2231:Election commission
1943:Expressive function
1472:Landlord–tenant law
1371:Consumer protection
934:Whelpdale v Cookson
835:Smith v. Van Gorkom
763:Shlensky v. Wrigley
482:Director duty cases
430:(1874) 10 Ch App 96
2189:Legal institutions
2056:Lawsuit/Litigation
2046:Dispute resolution
1851:Catholic canon law
1559:State of emergency
1522:Will and testament
1246:Law of obligations
1199:Constitutional law
1189:Administrative law
1096:(1676) 2 Freem. 13
1046:Companies Act 2006
1035:(1718) Prec Ch 505
953:(1886) 33 Ch D 347
923:English trusts law
872:964 A2d 106 (2009)
838:488 A2d 858 (1985)
787:Meinhard v. Salmon
443:English trusts law
241:stock market crash
219:
123:English trusts law
2371:
2370:
2031:Constitutionalism
1953:Law and economics
1791:Act of parliament
1529:Product liability
1482:Legal archaeology
1407:Environmental law
1401:Entertainment law
1241:International law
1132:Keech v. Sandford
1127:(Oxford 2006) 577
1105:(1687) 1 Vern 484
1064:Keech v. Sandford
1051:Boardman v Phipps
1011:Bhullar v Bhullar
975:Boardman v Phipps
903:
902:
897:directors' duties
884:308 US 295 (1939)
799:Guth v. Loft Inc.
709:
708:
675:Bhullar v Bhullar
647:Peskin v Anderson
515:Percival v Wright
449:
448:
403:Boardman v Phipps
391:Meinhard v Salmon
275:The influence of
135:directors' duties
110:
109:
18:Keech v. Sandford
16:(Redirected from
2416:
2389:1726 in case law
2346:
2345:
2344:
2332:
2331:
2155:Question of fact
2036:Criminal justice
1366:Construction law
1361:Conflict of laws
1326:Agricultural law
1168:
1161:
1154:
1145:
1144:
1106:
1103:
1097:
1094:
1088:
1085:
1079:
1076:Keech v Sandford
1073:
1067:
1061:
1055:
1048:section 175 and
1042:
1036:
1028:
942:Parker v McKenna
893:US corporate law
826:(1742) 26 ER 642
775:Keech v Sandford
736:
729:
722:
713:
712:
575:IDC Ltd v Cooley
494:(1742) 26 ER 642
476:
469:
462:
453:
452:
427:Parker v McKenna
379:
365:Armitage v Nurse
339:Keech v Sandford
330:(1678) 22 ER 817
312:
305:
298:
289:
288:
263:Rushworth's Case
153:South Sea Bubble
114:Keech v Sandford
86:Court membership
44:
35:Keech v Sandford
32:
31:
21:
2424:
2423:
2419:
2418:
2417:
2415:
2414:
2413:
2374:
2373:
2372:
2367:
2340:
2326:
2317:
2294:
2285:Political party
2258:Legal education
2246:Law enforcement
2226:Court of equity
2184:
2160:Question of law
2113:Practice of law
2093:Judicial review
2007:
1958:Legal formalism
1938:Comparative law
1933:Contract theory
1916:
1836:Legal pluralism
1807:
1796:Act of Congress
1720:Executive order
1686:
1588:
1507:Nationality law
1432:Immigration law
1356:Competition law
1309:
1177:
1172:
1140:(1978) 18 ALR 1
1114:
1109:
1104:
1100:
1095:
1091:
1086:
1082:
1074:
1070:
1062:
1058:
1043:
1039:
1029:
1025:
1021:
904:
899:
885:
881:Pepper v Litton
873:
861:
849:
839:
827:
815:
803:
791:
779:
767:
755:
743:
740:
710:
705:
695:
681:
667:
653:
639:
627:
615:
603:
591:
579:
567:
555:
543:
531:
519:
507:
495:
483:
480:
450:
445:
431:
419:
415:Holder v Holder
407:
395:
383:
377:
369:
357:
345:
331:
327:Morley v Morley
319:
316:
286:
269:Walley v Walley
233:
201:Lord Chancellor
197:
171:
60:31 October 1726
52:Exchequer Court
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
2422:
2412:
2411:
2406:
2401:
2396:
2391:
2386:
2369:
2368:
2366:
2365:
2358:
2351:
2337:
2334:Law portal
2322:
2319:
2318:
2316:
2315:
2314:
2313:
2302:
2300:
2296:
2295:
2293:
2292:
2287:
2282:
2277:
2272:
2267:
2266:
2265:
2255:
2254:
2253:
2243:
2238:
2233:
2228:
2223:
2218:
2213:
2208:
2203:
2198:
2192:
2190:
2186:
2185:
2183:
2182:
2177:
2172:
2170:Trial advocacy
2167:
2162:
2157:
2152:
2151:
2150:
2145:
2140:
2135:
2130:
2125:
2120:
2110:
2105:
2100:
2095:
2090:
2085:
2084:
2083:
2078:
2068:
2063:
2058:
2053:
2048:
2043:
2038:
2033:
2028:
2023:
2017:
2015:
2009:
2008:
2006:
2005:
2000:
1995:
1990:
1985:
1980:
1975:
1970:
1965:
1960:
1955:
1950:
1945:
1940:
1935:
1930:
1924:
1922:
1918:
1917:
1915:
1914:
1909:
1904:
1899:
1894:
1893:
1892:
1882:
1881:
1880:
1875:
1870:
1865:
1860:
1855:
1854:
1853:
1838:
1833:
1828:
1823:
1817:
1815:
1809:
1808:
1806:
1805:
1800:
1799:
1798:
1793:
1788:
1778:
1777:
1776:
1766:
1761:
1756:
1751:
1750:
1749:
1744:
1739:
1729:
1728:
1727:
1722:
1717:
1707:
1702:
1700:Ballot measure
1696:
1694:
1688:
1687:
1685:
1684:
1679:
1677:Legal treatise
1674:
1673:
1672:
1667:
1657:
1656:
1655:
1645:
1643:Letters patent
1640:
1635:
1634:
1633:
1623:
1618:
1613:
1604:
1598:
1596:
1594:Sources of law
1590:
1589:
1587:
1586:
1581:
1579:Unenforced law
1576:
1571:
1566:
1561:
1556:
1551:
1546:
1541:
1536:
1531:
1526:
1525:
1524:
1519:
1509:
1504:
1499:
1494:
1489:
1484:
1479:
1474:
1469:
1464:
1459:
1454:
1449:
1444:
1439:
1434:
1429:
1424:
1419:
1414:
1409:
1404:
1398:
1393:
1388:
1383:
1378:
1373:
1368:
1363:
1358:
1353:
1351:Commercial law
1348:
1343:
1338:
1333:
1328:
1323:
1317:
1315:
1311:
1310:
1308:
1307:
1302:
1297:
1292:
1291:
1290:
1280:
1275:
1270:
1269:
1268:
1263:
1253:
1248:
1243:
1238:
1233:
1228:
1223:
1218:
1217:
1216:
1206:
1201:
1196:
1191:
1185:
1183:
1179:
1178:
1171:
1170:
1163:
1156:
1148:
1142:
1141:
1135:
1128:
1121:
1118:
1113:
1110:
1108:
1107:
1098:
1089:
1080:
1068:
1066:All ER Rep 230
1056:
1037:
1022:
1020:
1017:
1016:
1015:
1007:
999:
996:Theft Act 1968
987:
979:
971:
963:
954:
946:
938:
930:
925:
920:
915:
913:UK company law
910:
901:
900:
890:
887:
886:
878:
875:
874:
866:
863:
862:
854:
851:
850:
844:
841:
840:
832:
829:
828:
820:
817:
816:
808:
805:
804:
796:
793:
792:
784:
781:
780:
772:
769:
768:
760:
757:
756:
748:
745:
744:
739:
738:
731:
724:
716:
707:
706:
703:UK company law
700:
697:
696:
686:
683:
682:
672:
669:
668:
665:EWHC (Ch) 4159
658:
655:
654:
644:
641:
640:
632:
629:
628:
620:
617:
616:
608:
605:
604:
596:
593:
592:
584:
581:
580:
572:
569:
568:
560:
557:
556:
548:
545:
544:
536:
533:
532:
524:
521:
520:
512:
509:
508:
500:
497:
496:
488:
485:
484:
479:
478:
471:
464:
456:
447:
446:
439:Fiduciary duty
436:
433:
432:
424:
421:
420:
412:
409:
408:
400:
397:
396:
388:
385:
384:
374:
371:
370:
362:
359:
358:
350:
347:
346:
336:
333:
332:
324:
321:
320:
315:
314:
307:
300:
292:
285:
282:
232:
229:
196:
193:
179:Romford Market
170:
167:
108:
107:
103:
102:
98:
97:
92:
88:
87:
83:
82:
77:
73:
72:
66:
62:
61:
58:
54:
53:
50:
46:
45:
37:
36:
26:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2421:
2410:
2407:
2405:
2402:
2400:
2397:
2395:
2392:
2390:
2387:
2385:
2382:
2381:
2379:
2364:
2363:
2359:
2357:
2356:
2352:
2350:
2349:
2338:
2336:
2335:
2330:
2324:
2323:
2320:
2312:
2309:
2308:
2307:
2304:
2303:
2301:
2297:
2291:
2288:
2286:
2283:
2281:
2278:
2276:
2273:
2271:
2268:
2264:
2261:
2260:
2259:
2256:
2252:
2249:
2248:
2247:
2244:
2242:
2239:
2237:
2234:
2232:
2229:
2227:
2224:
2222:
2219:
2217:
2216:Civil society
2214:
2212:
2209:
2207:
2204:
2202:
2199:
2197:
2194:
2193:
2191:
2187:
2181:
2178:
2176:
2175:Trier of fact
2173:
2171:
2168:
2166:
2163:
2161:
2158:
2156:
2153:
2149:
2146:
2144:
2141:
2139:
2136:
2134:
2131:
2129:
2126:
2124:
2121:
2119:
2116:
2115:
2114:
2111:
2109:
2106:
2104:
2101:
2099:
2096:
2094:
2091:
2089:
2086:
2082:
2079:
2077:
2074:
2073:
2072:
2069:
2067:
2064:
2062:
2061:Legal opinion
2059:
2057:
2054:
2052:
2049:
2047:
2044:
2042:
2041:Court-martial
2039:
2037:
2034:
2032:
2029:
2027:
2024:
2022:
2019:
2018:
2016:
2014:
2013:Jurisprudence
2010:
2004:
2001:
1999:
1996:
1994:
1991:
1989:
1986:
1984:
1981:
1979:
1976:
1974:
1971:
1969:
1966:
1964:
1961:
1959:
1956:
1954:
1951:
1949:
1946:
1944:
1941:
1939:
1936:
1934:
1931:
1929:
1926:
1925:
1923:
1919:
1913:
1910:
1908:
1905:
1903:
1902:Statutory law
1900:
1898:
1897:Socialist law
1895:
1891:
1890:Byzantine law
1888:
1887:
1886:
1883:
1879:
1876:
1874:
1871:
1869:
1866:
1864:
1861:
1859:
1856:
1852:
1849:
1848:
1847:
1844:
1843:
1842:
1841:Religious law
1839:
1837:
1834:
1832:
1829:
1827:
1824:
1822:
1819:
1818:
1816:
1814:
1813:Legal systems
1810:
1804:
1801:
1797:
1794:
1792:
1789:
1787:
1784:
1783:
1782:
1781:Statutory law
1779:
1775:
1772:
1771:
1770:
1767:
1765:
1762:
1760:
1757:
1755:
1752:
1748:
1745:
1743:
1740:
1738:
1735:
1734:
1733:
1730:
1726:
1723:
1721:
1718:
1716:
1713:
1712:
1711:
1708:
1706:
1703:
1701:
1698:
1697:
1695:
1693:
1689:
1683:
1680:
1678:
1675:
1671:
1668:
1666:
1663:
1662:
1661:
1658:
1654:
1651:
1650:
1649:
1646:
1644:
1641:
1639:
1636:
1632:
1629:
1628:
1627:
1624:
1622:
1619:
1617:
1614:
1612:
1611:Statutory law
1608:
1605:
1603:
1600:
1599:
1597:
1595:
1591:
1585:
1582:
1580:
1577:
1575:
1572:
1570:
1569:Transport law
1567:
1565:
1562:
1560:
1557:
1555:
1552:
1550:
1547:
1545:
1542:
1540:
1537:
1535:
1532:
1530:
1527:
1523:
1520:
1518:
1515:
1514:
1513:
1510:
1508:
1505:
1503:
1500:
1498:
1495:
1493:
1490:
1488:
1487:Legal fiction
1485:
1483:
1480:
1478:
1475:
1473:
1470:
1468:
1465:
1463:
1460:
1458:
1455:
1453:
1450:
1448:
1445:
1443:
1440:
1438:
1435:
1433:
1430:
1428:
1425:
1423:
1420:
1418:
1417:Financial law
1415:
1413:
1410:
1408:
1405:
1402:
1399:
1397:
1394:
1392:
1389:
1387:
1384:
1382:
1379:
1377:
1376:Corporate law
1374:
1372:
1369:
1367:
1364:
1362:
1359:
1357:
1354:
1352:
1349:
1347:
1344:
1342:
1339:
1337:
1334:
1332:
1329:
1327:
1324:
1322:
1319:
1318:
1316:
1312:
1306:
1303:
1301:
1300:Statutory law
1298:
1296:
1293:
1289:
1286:
1285:
1284:
1281:
1279:
1276:
1274:
1271:
1267:
1264:
1262:
1259:
1258:
1257:
1254:
1252:
1249:
1247:
1244:
1242:
1239:
1237:
1234:
1232:
1229:
1227:
1224:
1222:
1219:
1215:
1212:
1211:
1210:
1207:
1205:
1202:
1200:
1197:
1195:
1192:
1190:
1187:
1186:
1184:
1182:Core subjects
1180:
1176:
1169:
1164:
1162:
1157:
1155:
1150:
1149:
1146:
1139:
1136:
1133:
1129:
1126:
1122:
1119:
1116:
1115:
1102:
1093:
1084:
1077:
1072:
1065:
1060:
1053:
1052:
1047:
1041:
1034:
1033:
1027:
1023:
1013:
1012:
1008:
1005:
1004:
1000:
997:
993:
992:
991:Oxford v Moss
988:
985:
984:
980:
977:
976:
972:
969:
968:
964:
960:
959:
955:
952:
951:
947:
944:
943:
939:
936:
935:
931:
929:
926:
924:
921:
919:
916:
914:
911:
909:
908:Corporate law
906:
905:
898:
894:
888:
883:
882:
876:
871:
870:
864:
859:
858:
852:
847:
842:
837:
836:
830:
825:
824:
818:
813:
812:
806:
801:
800:
794:
789:
788:
782:
777:
776:
770:
765:
764:
758:
753:
752:
746:
737:
732:
730:
725:
723:
718:
717:
714:
704:
698:
694:
691:
690:
684:
680:
677:
676:
670:
666:
663:
662:
656:
652:
649:
648:
642:
637:
636:
630:
625:
624:
618:
613:
612:
606:
601:
600:
594:
589:
588:
582:
577:
576:
570:
565:
564:
558:
553:
552:
546:
541:
540:
534:
529:
528:
522:
517:
516:
510:
505:
504:
498:
493:
492:
486:
477:
472:
470:
465:
463:
458:
457:
454:
444:
440:
434:
429:
428:
422:
417:
416:
410:
405:
404:
398:
393:
392:
386:
381:
380:
372:
367:
366:
360:
355:
354:
348:
344:
341:
340:
334:
329:
328:
322:
313:
308:
306:
301:
299:
294:
293:
290:
281:
278:
273:
271:
270:
265:
264:
259:
258:
253:
248:
246:
242:
238:
227:
224:
217:
213:
208:
206:
202:
191:
186:
184:
180:
176:
166:
163:
158:
154:
149:
147:
144:
140:
136:
132:
128:
124:
120:
116:
115:
104:
99:
96:
93:
91:Judge sitting
89:
84:
81:
78:
74:
71:
67:
63:
59:
55:
51:
47:
43:
38:
33:
30:
19:
2360:
2353:
2339:
2325:
2098:Jurisdiction
2066:Legal remedy
2021:Adjudication
1921:Legal theory
1759:Ratification
1754:Promulgation
1725:Proclamation
1705:Codification
1638:Human rights
1626:Divine right
1616:Constitution
1584:Women in law
1502:Military law
1497:Marriage law
1492:Maritime law
1391:Election law
1331:Aviation law
1321:Abortion law
1273:Property law
1209:Criminal law
1137:
1131:
1124:
1101:
1092:
1083:
1075:
1071:
1063:
1059:
1049:
1040:
1030:
1026:
1009:
1001:
989:
981:
973:
970:1 ALL ER 378
965:
956:
948:
940:
932:
879:
867:
855:
833:
821:
809:
797:
785:
774:
773:
761:
749:
687:
679:EWCA Civ 424
673:
659:
651:EWCA Civ 326
645:
633:
621:
609:
597:
585:
573:
566:1 All ER 378
561:
549:
537:
527:Cook v Deeks
525:
513:
501:
489:
425:
413:
401:
389:
375:
363:
351:
338:
337:
325:
276:
274:
267:
261:
255:
251:
249:
234:
231:Significance
220:
198:
188:
172:
161:
150:
142:
113:
112:
111:
95:Lord King LC
29:
2270:Legislature
2201:Bureaucracy
1998:Rule of man
1993:Rule of law
1968:Libertarian
1831:Chinese law
1732:Legislation
1682:Regulations
1670:Law reports
1648:Natural law
1544:Reparations
1539:Refugee law
1462:Jurimetrics
1403:(Media law)
1341:Banking law
1336:Amnesty law
1314:Disciplines
1251:Private law
958:Bray v Ford
950:Re Whiteley
778:EWHC Ch J76
353:Bray v Ford
343:EWHC Ch J76
257:Holt v Holt
139:company law
70:EWHC Ch J76
2378:Categories
2263:Law school
2143:Prosecutor
2081:Magistrate
1868:Jewish law
1826:Common law
1747:Rulemaking
1742:Regulation
1692:Law making
1631:Divine law
1607:Legal code
1554:Sports law
1477:Law of war
1427:Health law
1412:Family law
1396:Energy law
1346:Bankruptcy
1283:Punishment
1278:Public law
1112:References
848:§102(b)(7)
638:1 BCLC 433
626:1 BCLC 561
280:conflict.
223:cestui que
76:Transcript
2241:Judiciary
2236:Executive
2211:The bench
2148:Solicitor
2123:Barrister
2003:Sociology
1988:Pseudolaw
1928:Anarchist
1885:Roman law
1873:Parsi law
1858:Hindu law
1846:Canon law
1821:Civil law
1774:Concordat
1665:Precedent
1574:Trust law
1549:Space law
1386:Drugs law
1256:Procedure
1194:Civil law
986:1 WLR 443
578:1 WLR 443
205:Lord King
127:fiduciary
125:, on the
2348:Category
2290:Tribunal
2275:Military
2118:Attorney
2088:Judgment
1948:Feminist
1863:Jain law
1660:Case law
1381:Cyberlaw
1288:Corporal
1266:Criminal
1236:Evidence
1226:Doctrine
1204:Contract
1006:2 AC 663
554:1 Ch 304
530:1 AC 554
518:2 Ch 421
284:See also
195:Judgment
101:Keywords
65:Citation
2362:Outline
2299:History
2206:The bar
2180:Verdict
2128:Counsel
2108:Justice
1963:History
1786:Statute
1602:Charter
1564:Tax law
1512:Probate
978:2 AC 46
962:duty…."
693:UKSC 71
406:2 AC 46
57:Decided
2280:Police
2251:Agency
2133:Lawyer
1878:Sharia
1769:Treaty
1764:Repeal
1710:Decree
1621:Custom
1517:Estate
1467:Labour
1231:Equity
1054:UKHL 2
614:Ch 164
602:Ch 477
590:AC 821
542:Ch 407
418:Ch 353
382:1 Ch 1
368:Ch 241
266:, and
183:London
131:trusts
2355:Index
2221:Court
2165:Trial
2071:Judge
1912:Yassa
1715:Edict
1261:Civil
1214:Crime
1044:e.g.
1019:Notes
356:AC 44
277:Keech
252:Keech
181:near
175:lease
169:Facts
162:Keech
117:
49:Court
2103:Jury
2051:Fiqh
1907:Xeer
1305:Tort
1221:Deed
895:and
891:See
701:see
441:and
437:see
199:The
1175:Law
998:s 4
177:on
143:any
137:in
2380::
1609:/
272:.
260:,
247:.
203:,
148:.
1167:e
1160:t
1153:v
735:e
728:t
721:v
475:e
468:t
461:v
311:e
304:t
297:v
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
