Lim Yak Hua v Eastern & Oriental Hotel

JurisdictionMalaysia
CourtUnspecified court (Malaysia)
Year1951
Date1951

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
974 cases
  • Great Peace Shipping Ltd v Tsavliris Salvage (International) Ltd (Cape Providence)
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 14 October 2002
    ...77 The second and third of these elements are well exemplified by the decision of the High Court of Australia in McRae v Commonwealth Disposals Commission (1951) 84 CLR 377. The Commission invited tenders for the purchase of "an oil tanker lying on the Jourmaund Reef…said to contain oil". T......
  • Murphy v Brentwood District Council
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 21 December 1989
    ...its performance to Mayer. That conclusion was, in his view, in accordance with the judgment of Denning L.J. in Cassidy v. Ministry of Health (1951) 2 K.B., 343, 363; with the reasoning of Lindley L.J. in Hardaker v. Idle District Council (1896) 1 Q.B. 335, and of Morris J. in Darling v. Att......
  • Egger v Chelmsford (Viscount)
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal
    • 22 July 1964
    ...without being infected by the malice of the others. It was so held in the case of trustees by Mr Justice Slade in Longdon-Griffiths v. Smith 1951, 1 King's Bench, p. 295 and in the case of partners by Mr Justice Winn in Meekins v. Henson 1962, 3 Weekly Law Reports, p. 299. I entirely agree ......
  • Smith v Littlewoods Organisation Ltd; Maloco v Littlewoods Organisation Ltd
    • United Kingdom
    • House of Lords
    • 5 February 1987
    ...where liability is imposed as to identify those where it is not (see Anns v. Merton London Borough Council [1978] A.C. 728Bolton v. Stone [1951] A.C. 850, 868 and expanded in more particularity by Lord Wilberforce in Goldman v. Hargrave [1967] 1 A.C. 645 when dealing with a fire upon premis......
  • Get Started for Free