HUDSON'S

BUILDING
AND ENGINEERING
(: CONTRACTS
Including the Duties and Liabilities of
ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS

ELEVENTH EDITION

BY
I
-\
I.N. DUNCAN WALLACE Q.C., M.A. oxoN.
of the Middle Temple, Barrister-at-Law

VOLUMEl
GENERAL INTRODUCTION AND PREFACE

My own acquaintance with construction law started when I was invited

to join the chambers of the late E. J. Rimmer in Lincoln's Inn in 1952, and
improved later as joint editor with him of the Eighth Edition of Hudson
published in 1959, when the task of modernising Hudson was begun, and
later when I continued that task and began extending its range into the
Commonwealth jurisdictions as editor of the Ninth Edition published in
1965.
The Tenth Edition of Hudson was published in 1970, with a Supplement
in 1979. In the event, therefore, the Eleventh Edition has taken a further
fifteen years to emerge ( or nearly 25 years since the Tenth Edition), and
I am grateful to Sweet & Maxwell for their patience in tolerating my
idiosyncratic and largely self-extended timetable.
A part of the reason for the delay was my desire to make at least a
superficial examination of the mountain of reported construction case law
available in the United States, which I felt sure could supplement gaps in
the relatively small factual coverage of the case law reported in England
and the Commonwealth at that time, and for this purpose I have spent two
months of every year since 1977 as a Visiting Scholar enjoying the unique
facilities and library of the Boalt Hall School of Law in the University of
California at Berkeley, surpassing even in its Commonwealth range most
libraries currently available in England.
A second reason for the delay was my growing belief that the proper
interpretation of construction contracts required much more analysis and
rethinking, particularly of the underlying practical and commercial real-
ities of construction projects generally, and of the relationships and skills
of the parties to those projects in particular- often insufficiently under-
stood or expressed in misleading language by the draftsmen of the con-
tracts themselves, or indeed by the professions or narrower vested
interests variously instructing those draftsmen, so that in the event much
more than might have been expected has traditionally had to be left to the
interpretation or implication of terms by judiciaries (who would them-
selves be far less familiar with the much more complicated background of
construction contracts than, for example, with contracts for sale of goods
or houses, of which they would have had the very important advantage of
some personal experience). Nor, to put it mildly, have the draftsmen of
construction contracts been very competent even where their instructions
have been clear.
As a result, quite apart from continuing with a series of detailed com-
mentaries on the standard forms, which since 1970 have included com-
mentaries on the FIDIC Third and Fourth Editions and the English Fifth

vii
 -~
i

viii GENERAL INTRODUCTION AND PREFACE GENERAL INTRODUCTION AND PREFACE ix

Edition ICE Civil Engineering Contract, I have produced during the This brings me to the English standard forms. They have always, of
intervening years a series of papers, usually published in the form of arti- course, been discussed, in many instances critically, at many points in
cles, principally in the Law Quarterly Review and later in the Construc- recent Hudson editions. In the case of the RIBAfJCT forms, the· 1963
tion Law Journal, I.C.L.R. and A.C.L.R., where I have examined current forms current at the time of the Tenth Edition (with a number of
developments in the case law of contract and later of tort, insofar as they Revisions continuing up to 1977) were in 1980 replaced by an entirely re-
might affect construction problems, in much greater detail than would written contract, which continued and refined still further the substance of
normally be possible in a text book like Hudson. Some 20 of these, with 10 the policies and financial claims against the owner's interest of its prede-
additional chapters and a linking narrative, were collected and published cessor, but which now employed an entirely new and different numbering,
by Sweet & Maxwell in 1986 in Construction Contracts: Principles and together with frequently unexplained cross-referencing which, whether
Policies (referred to throughout this Eleventh Edition as "C.C.P.P."). deliberately or not, often serves to obscure its purpose and make compre-
Another development which has influenced my thinking since the hension exceptionally difficult, even to the informed eye, on a first read-
Tenth Edition was the task of drafting a wholly new building contract for ing. In the case of the ICE conditions, the Fourth (1955) Edition, current
the Singapore private sector which was published in 1980, with some very at the time of the Tenth Edition of Hudson, was replaced by the Fifth
minor later revisions, and which I undertook for the Singapore Institute of Edition in 1973. This, although with a much closer affinity of structure and
Architects. In this, I was probably uniquely fortunate in being given a far language to its predecessor, now opened the door to a series of sweeping
freer hand by the SIA Contracts Committee to develop my own ideas, in new financial claims against the owner, including particularly a global
the light of Singapore local conditions, than is normally accorded to a claim for unexpected expense under Clause 13(3); claims for omitted
draftsman. Nor was I troubled by the stultifying process of negotiation items and higher prices on measurement under dauses 55(2) and 56(2);
(and attrition) between essentially conflicting interests (giving the power and a comprehensive series of liabilities for nominated sub-contractor
of veto, in effect, to the least reasonable party) which is the prime reason default under Clause 59. I will return to this subject of the standard forms
for the very poor quality and policies of the English standard forms, since I later in this Introduction.
made it a condition of undertaking the task after earlier experience with Whep considering the text of the Eleventh Edition, it may be helpful to
the drafting of the 1955 ICE forms with E. J. Rimmer Q.C., that only the note that whereas the 1963 R!BA/JCT and 1955 ICE Fourth Edition
professional body, and no other organisation, should be responsible for forms of contract current at the date of the Tenth Edition exerted enor-
and in the last resort decide the contents of the contract. I shall always be mous influence on domestic standard forms outside England, particularly
specially indebted to Mr. Sim Hong Boon and his predecessor as President in countries with a recent colonial background, such as Malaysia, Singa-
of the SIA, Mr. Albert Hong (who was later to be a tower of strength in pore, Hong Kong and the West Indies, and also on the international
overcoming oppositori. to the contract) for the way in which I was allowed FIDIC contracts, it may be speculated that the free-ranging claims so posi-
freedom to override even considerations of short-term convenience and tively encouraged by the ICE Fifth Edition and the unforgiving and
interest of the SIA's own professional membership in order to secure a impenetrable style of the 1980 RIBA/JCT forms, as well as their policies,
firm but fair contract between owner and contractor. The result was a rela- proved too much for foreign owners and governments; with the result that
tively sophisticated and lengthy form of contract, with attempted sol- it is their respective 1955 and 1963 predecessors which continue to serve as
utions to virtually all those anomalies and problems leading to doubt or the often closely followed basis of many overseas contracts. Indeed, the
dispute in construction contracts which my own previous experience at 1963 RIBNJCT contracts, in spite of sustained and organised pressures
the Bar up to 1980 had enabled me to identify. for the use domestically in England of their successor RIBNJCT 1980
Consequently, while much of the Eleventh Edition, like its prede- forms (which eventually appear to have succeeded in persuading many
cessors, has inevitably had to be written in the immediate context of the local government and public bodies such as hospital boards), are still
English building and civil engineering standard forms, which tend to nevertheless being widely used by private or better informed public
dominate our own case law, this Singapore contract, and the solutions it owners in England, as reference to the reported cases in the Eleventh
has attempted or adopted, has been available for comment and compari- Edition will show. For this reason, a policy of continuing with references
son. Since the SIA 1980contract, with its Guidance Notes,is also set out in to the 1963, as well as to the 1980 R!BA/JCT counterparts with their
extenso in the appendices to C.C.P.P., reference to the SIA contract by different numbered paragraphs, has been followed in the text.
readers who have C.C.P.P. available will be to that extent facilitated, and I have already mentioned a number of in-depth papers written since the
is made fairly frequently in the text of the Eleventh Edition; by reference Tenth Edition, mostly in the form of articles published in the L.Q.R., the
to the relevant C.C.P.P. pages as well, at appropriate points Qfdifficulty or Construction Law Journal, l.C.L.R., A.C.L.R. or elsewhere, and that
for comparison with the traditional English draftsmanship. some 20 of these are reproduced-as chapters in C.C.P.P. References to
 x GENERAL INTRODUCTION AND PREFACE GENERAL INTRODUCTION AND PREFACE xi

these articles are footnoted in the text of the Eleventh Edition in the usual ution", together with mushrooming new bodies in many countries offer-
way, but with an alternative reference to the relevant C.C.P.P. chapter ing facilities for arbitration or dispute resolution, and for the appointment
which reproduces them where appropriate. Since C.C.P.P. was published of arbitrators or conciliators.
in 1986, however, I have written approximately 30 in-depth articles on In these developments many governments have tended to collaborate
construction topics, published in similar quarters. For convenience, as an enthusiastically, often motivated by a desire to attract international "busi-
Appendix to this Introduction, there are two lists, the first of the various ness" of this kind to their shores. In the domestic field, much of the liti-
earlier papers and articles referred to in the Eleventh Edition, together gation and reporting has, under recessionary pressures, concentrated
with the appropriate chapter number where reproduced in C.C.P.P., and excessively on tactical or procedural matters, such as summary judgment
the second a list of the later papers similarly referred to written and pub- or the raising of procedural obstacles (such as binding certification or limi-
tation defences) or else on the minutiae of interpretation of current stan-
lished since 1986.
dard forms, often poorly drafted and frequently subject to change in
response to the interests of the more powerful influences on their nego-
tiating bodies ( although exhibiting extreme rigidity when anomalies
Changed Background since the Tenth Edition affecting the interests of weaker influences become apparent). For ex-
ample, in a development reminiscent of the "battle of the forms" between
offer and acceptance documentation and counter-documentation in other
Recession, paradoxically, has always favoured the "business" of con- areas of commerce, a surge of new draftsmanship, particularly in sub-con-
struction litigation. Contractors in recessions price down to secure busi- tracts or so-called "managed" contracts (where in both cases producer
ness and survive, find their key men relatively unemployed before new interests will be on each side of the table) has endeavoured to accord
contracts can be obtained, and so have both the skilled personnel avail- finality on interim payment even to the uncertified accounts of a contractor
able and a pressing incentive to re-examine the history of their completed or sub-contractor who has carried out work on the one hand, or to the
contracts in order to squeeze the last possible drop of additional remuner- uncertified cross-claims for damages for delay or disturbance by owners or
ation which the claims mechanisms of those contracts and legal ingenuity main contractors on the other, in some cases complicated by provisions for
can provide. Equally, owners and developers, under the financial press- adjudication by persons other than the final arbitrator, with varied powers
ures of recession, and often seeing falling markets for their commercial to intervene or make temporarily binding orders pending full arbitration
projects, may endeavour to minimise or postpone payment by any means or litigation. 1
available, however irresponsible. This is apart altogether from opportun- In both the domestic and international fields governments or govern-
istic terminations of the contract by either side in such conditions in order ment-influenced judiciaries, in the apparent belief that more arbitration
to avoid its consequences. "business" would be attracted to their domestic jurisdictions, while at the
Coincidentally with the world-wide recession and collapse of projects same time unwilling for budgetary reasons to provide an adequate
and property markets stemming from the Arab oil embargo in the early judiciary for the purpose, have combined to restrict appeals from, and so
1970's, solicitors in England, who lost their conveyancing monopoly at the inevitably to reduce judicial control over, arbitration and arbitrators,2 and
same time as the major recessionary reductions in the conveyancing work also, in one very important Court of Appeal obiter dictum, to discourage
which had previously often subsidised other legal departments of their direct access to the courts in cases, where that would previously have been
,. firms, began to take a quite different look at litigation as a source of profit, allowed, based on very widely used arbitration clause wording in the two
i\,, and at construction litigation as a particularly profitable sector for principal standard forms in England for close on a century. 3
expanding their activities. These were in my view the two driving factors Predictably, this climate of abandonment of judicial control over arbi-
behind the undeniably huge increase in construction litigation which has trators, constantly if not vehemently advanced and supported by con-
taken place both domestically in common law countries as well as inter- tractors' organisations and by virtually every international institution
nationally since 1970. In its wake specialist judiciaries have been formed associated with arbitration (including UNCITRAL and its Model Law)
or expanded; almost every major commercial firm of lawyers now pro- must inevitably militate seriously against a just resolution of the dispute in
fesses construction expertise; construction specialist law reports (and
indeed over-reporting) and seminars on claims presentation have pro- I
See Chap. 6, Section 6(7).
2
liferated in most western countries; and a veritable construction litigation See B. T.P. Tioxide Ltd. v. Pioneer Shipping Ltd., The Nema [1982] A.C. 724, and see (1990)
6 Arb. Int. 253 where its policy is doubted and criticised.
industry of its own has come into being, with various classes of prac- l See the doubtful but potentially very damaging dicta in the Court of Appeal in Northern
titioner, legal and otherwise, offering their services as claims'consultants, Regional Health Authority v. Crouch Construction [1984] Q.B. 644, discussed in Chap. 6
expert witnesses, arbitrators, conciliators or experts in "dispute resol- Section 4(2), and see C.C.P.P., Chap. 17.
xii GENERAL INTRODUCTION AND PREFACE
GENERAL INTRODUCTION AND PREFACE xiii
many instances and, equally predictably bearing in mind the absence of
4
to the consequential obligation of the contractor, independent of fault, to
publicity and self-co-opting nature of many appointing bodies, more and
complete the described work undertaken by all necessary means under
more serious cases of genuine arbitrator misconduct and incompetence
the "inclusive price principle." 7 With the advent of a potential liability of
are beginning to reach the reports 5 ( at least partly perhaps because loss of
owners' A/Es to contractors in tort under the Hedley Byrne principle, the
rights of appeal is likely to re-direct advisers of aggrieved parties to exam-
extremely important and welcome English Court of Appeal decision in
ination of the possibility of removal of the arbitrator). Pacific Associates Ltd. v. Baxter (and in particular Ralph Gibson L.J.'s
In this confused and not very attractive climate, less and less interest
outstanding judgment in that case), made clear (in the context, there, of
seems to be shown by participants, whether in litigation or arbitration, in interim certification and of the engineer's preliminary ruling upon a con-
the substantive law of the interpretation of construction contracts, which tractor's claims under Clause 67 of the FJDIC contract) that within the
must be the background against which transient standard form vagaries general "contract setting" of a construction project there was no room for
and claims mechanisms and unbalanced contract policies must be any such duty to safeguard the contractor from economic loss. 8
assessed, and with which Hudson is primarily concerned. However, it can Pacific Associates was followed by the British Columbia Court of
be predicted (and indeed already observed) that informed domestic own- Appeal in what seemed the entirely satisfactory case of Edgeworth Con-
ers and their advisers will be increasingly likely to remove arbitration struction Ltd. v. F. Lea &Associates in 1991. 9 There (this time in the con-
clauses from their contracts, as the impartiality and experience of the text of an engineer's design duties) a duty to safeguard the contractor's
specialist judiciaries, such as the Official Referees in the High Court in economic interests was similarly rejected on a preliminary point of law,
England and the judges of the Commercial Division of the New South and two cases in first instance in Ontario (reported in Canadian B.C.L.)
Wales Supreme Court, for example, become more widely understood and not followed. Unfortunately, in one of the few really unsatisfactory Com-
appreciated by litigants and in particular by the owner/consumer parties monwealth decisions of the period under review, the Edgworth case was
to construction contracts who have so evidently been losers in these recent recently overruled in the Supreme Court of Canada in 1993, in a case
developments. which it may be predicted will return to haunt that Court. Due to the ob-
scurity of its facts and its being decided on a preliminary point of law, it is
The Law since the Tenth Edition difficult to know what practical conclusions engineers or architects or
their advisers should draw from it in what has been, apparently, some area
Since 1970 there have been unusually rapid and important changes in of design preparation of the contract documents by a firm of engineers on
the law affecting construction contracts. behalf of the owner prior to tender. Nearly six pages are devoted to analy-
(a) The Hedley Byrne v. Heller liability in tort. The combined impact of sis and discussion of this case in Chapter 1. Meanwhile, the Court of
the decision of the House of Lords in Hedley Byrne v. Heller in 1964, and Appeal in Ontario in 1992, in Auto-Concrete Curb Ltd. v. South National
of the new damages liability for innocent misrepresentation in the English River Conservation Authority, 10 has held that the engineer was liable in
Misrepresentation Act, 1967, had not yet been felt by the time of the tort to dredging contractors for failing to make inquiries at the tender
Tenth Edition, which was compelled to speculate on the likely conse- stage and to warn them that one particular method of dredging (not called
quences of these liabilities in the construction field. 6 These subjects now for or described in the contract documents but which the contractors had
occupy no less than 60 pages of text in Chapter 1, in addition to the closely indicated in their tender offer that they proposed to use) might require
related subject of the owner's obligation in relation to the state of the site permission or be prohibited by the regulatory authoritieS. This case, with
in Chapter 4. In this context, it was stated in the Preface to the Tenth respect, seems to have lost touch with all realities of the engineer/contrac-
Edition that perhaps the single most widespread and damaging misunder- tor relationship and with a century of owner/contractor case law under the
standing of the background of construction projects by judiciaries and inclusive price principle, as well as imposing a serious and impractical con-
others (often assisted by misleading "cosmetic" language and descriptions flict of interest on the owner's engineer.
in the contracts themselves) related to the alleged "captain of the ship" Coupled with two earlier difficult economic loss cases in 1979 (then in
role and superior expertise of the owner's A/E in supervision or construc- the context of supervision and temporary works, where engineers had
tion methods, and also to the very limited nature of the NE's powers of been held to owe an economic loss duty to contractors11 ) and in spite of,
intervention or control over temporary works or methods of working, and
7
See Chap. 4, Section 1.
s [1990] 1 Q.B. 993.
9
[1991] 4 W.W.R. 251.
4 See Kirby P's eloquent protest in a dissenting judgment in the New South Wales Court of
!O [1992] 89 D.L.R. (4th) 394.
Appeal in Warley Ltd. v. Adco Constructions Ltd., quoted in Chap. 18, par~.)8·024.
5 See Chap. 18, Sections 4 and 5; and (1990) 6 Arb. Int. 253, and (1991) 7 Arb:-lnt. 149. u Demers v. Dufresne [1979] S.C.R. 146 and Trident Construction Ltd. v. Wardrop [1979] 6
6 Tenth Edition, pp. 66-67.
W.W.R. 481, both discussed and doubted in C.C.P.P., Chap. 5, with contrary Canadian
cases cited.
 r-

xiv GENERAL INTRODUCTION AND PREFACE GENERAL INTRODUCTION AND PREFACE xv

not surprisingly, other conflicting decisions in the Supreme Court of Can- embarrassing anomaly discouraging access to the courts in what had pre-
ada and elsewhere, the law in Canada in this area now seems confused and viously been considered proper cases (from a justice-driven viewpoint)
to have imposed generalised economic loss duties owed by owners' A/Es for review.
to contractors in tort which other jurisdictions would be wise not to follow. ( d) Arbitration. Many countries have introduced new legislation on
(b) Interim Certificates and Set-off. The years 1971-1973 saw no less arbitration since 1970, much of it concerned to foster and attract the new
than seven Court of Appeal decisions, applying what became known as wave of international arbitration, and to reduce control over arbitrators
"the rule in Dawnay's case," in which owners or main contractors were by the courts in accordance with current climates of opinion to that effect
held to be precluded from raising defences of defective work or delay in international circles. In England there have been two extremely import-
against main contractors or sub-contractors suing for work done on archi- ant Acts of 1975 and 1979 superimposed on the "parent" Act of 1950, and
tects' interim certificates under the traditional wording in the English the latter Act became the vehicle for what are now known as the "the
RIBNJCT contracts. 12 Here, leave to appeal was consistently refused by Nema Guidelines" laid down by Lord Diplock shortly thereafter in the
the Court of Appeal, and on a first occasion by the House of Lords itself. House of Lords. These had the effect of severely restricting rights of
However, the meteoric rise and fall of Lord Denning's "cash flow" prin- appeal from arbitrators by comparison with appeals previously effectively
ciple was finally brought to an end by the Gilbert-Ash case in the House of allowable as of right under the 1950 Act. There has also been a confused
Lords in 1973.13 An invaluable by-product of these aberrations, however, and apparently inconsistent case law in England of recent years with
lay in a welcome and now seminal statement of principle by Lord Diplock regard to refusals of stay in tripartite proceedings, "step in the action"
in the Gilbert-Ash case, which greatly clarified (if it did not revolutionise) refusals of stay, appeals from arbitrator's orders on costs outside a normal
the interpretation of certification provisions generally by requiring judicial discretion, and appeals generally on points of law from arbitrators
explicit wording, leaving of no doubt, if loss of the right to pursue ordinary awards or decisions. Occasionally this case law has been "justice-driven",
common law remedies (that is, a binding intention) was to be achieved by but more frequently not. 18 Chapter 18 on arbitration occupies 156 pages,
the draftsman. 14 In the previously difficult and complex field of binding which it is hoped will be of assistance as a "mini-textbook" alongside other
certificates in construction contracts, Gilbert-Ash must rank as the most works (principally, of course, Mustill & Boyd) with particular reference to
important and valuable case since the last Edition, and has been applied to construction disputes.
great advantage by the lower courts in later cases. 15 (e) Insolvency. Here again, many countries have introduced new insol-
(c) The "Crouch" View. Mention has already been made of the obiter vency legislation. In England massive Acts in 1985 and 1986, replacing the
dicta in the Court of Appeal, not at present seriously challenged in Bankruptcy Act of 1914 and the Companies Acts of 1948 and 1985, have
England, to the effect that arbitrators alone, but not the courts, have the been drafted in two stages in accordance with the parliamentary conven-
power to re-open and review the decisions or opinions of an A/E where an tions distinguishing between consolidating and innovative legislation, but
arbitration clause with the traditional "open up, review and revise" word- which unfortunately make the task of tracing the earlier law of personal or
ing is present in the contract ( as in the case of both English standard forms company insolvency, so as to compare it with its new counterpart and
for nearly a century). 16 If correct, this view must be tactically damaging determine whether substantive change has taken place, one of maximum
and unjust, particularly to unpaid contractors seeking summary judgment difficulty. On the whole, there appears in fact to have been comparatively
in the Courts, or to parties seeking the courts as a preferable tribunal for little substantive change in regard to the position of third parties in con-
proceedings involving third parties. The Crouch interpretation flies in the tractual relations with an insolveilt party (with which Hudson is princi-
face of a near-century use of this wording in arbitration clauses, as well as a pally concerned), save in regard to the new process of administration,
formidable line of contrary authority in England, Australia and New which does not seem likely to be involved very often in the case of con-
Zealand, and makes no contribution to justice, except for the openly struction contracts. Here again, Chapter 16 will, it is hoped, prove of some
avowed objective of Sir John Donaldson M.R. that it should discourage assistance as a compressed "mini-textbook", and occupies some 37 pages.
parties from access to the official Referee's courts, where the lists were ( f) Guarantees and Bonds. A principal new development here has been
becoming too long. 17 The Crouch view has been mentioned on a number the emergence in the construction field, mainly but not exclusively in
of occasions in England but never seriously challenged, and remains an international contracts, of "on demand" performance bonds. Uncon-
ditional guarantees of the payment obligations of a debtor (that is to say
12 See C.C.P.P., Chaps. 14, 15, and 16. letters of credit) have, of course, been a common feature in commerce for
iJ [1974) A.C. 689. For this history, see Chap. 6, Section 6(7). centuries. Equally, due performance bonds, equivalent only to a guaran-
14 See Chap. 6, Section 1(1) and Section 6(7).
1> See Chap. 6, Sections 3, 4, and 6(7).
tee of the financial ability of the debtor to meet his performance obli-
16 See Chap. 6, Section 4(2).
11 See Chap. 6, Section 4(2) and C.C.P.P., Chap. 17. 18
For the inconsistencies, see the review in Chap. 18, Section 6.
 .r---

xvi GENERAL INTRODUCTION AND PREFACE GENERAL INTRODUCTION AND PREFACE xvii

gations, have been a century-long feature of construction contracts. The endeavours to provide a "mini-text-book" on this subject occupying some
new "performance" bonds, not conditioned on proof of failure to perform 65 pages of text. One particularly gratifying result of this research, given
(as in the case of traditional bonds), but merely on demand or on some my new address in Chambers and respect for a great English judge, was
other arbitrary stipulated event, have caused problems of interpretation my discovery and resurrection into the text-books of a particularly valu-
which the courts have appeared to have found difficult. 19 able and trenchant passage of Lord Atkin on the use of the traditional
In addition, and perhaps more seriously, the-English courts have failed English negative form of bond by commercial sureties.22a
to apply sensible pro tanto doctrines of both interpretation and measure of (g) Interpretation of Construction Contracts. In the Preface to the Tenth
damage in order to defeat persistent and frequently unmeritorious exploi- Edition, I noted a tendency of the English courts to adopt strict and "liter-
tation by the bonding industry of old and rigid doctrines evolved by the alist" interpretative attitudes {the expression is Lord Diplock's), more
courts in the nineteenth century to protected gratuitous "accommo- appropriate to a statute than to a commercial document, when consider-
dation" sureties, but wholly inappropriate to the interpretation of docu- ing standard forms of construction contract, and identified a number of
mentation used by commercial sureties for profit, and usually drafted by "difficult" interpretations apparently arising from this cause, mentioning
them. specifically Gloucestershire County Council v. Richardson, Bickerton v.
However, the English Court of Appeal has recently professed a new N. W. Metropolitan Hospital Board, and the then recently decided
interest in (and an apparent surprise at) the archaic "negative" wording of decision of Megarry J. in Hounslow L.B.C. v. Twickenham Gardens
the English bond to which commercial sureties appear to be so attached, Development (not yet reported in 1970). Since 1970 I regret to have to
and has very recently arrived at a startling "on-demand" interpretation of record a surprising number of cases where extraodinarily legalistic
such traditional wording, 20 apparently based upon alleged cash-flow exi- interpretations "offending business common sense" have, as it seems to
gencies in construction contracts and bearing a striking resemblance to me, been arrived at, including a number in the House of Lords itself, which
the earlier Dawnay reasoning and interpretation (also based on alleged I have found difficult if not in some cases impossible to explain or justify.
;I "cash-flow" exigencies) of interim certificate provisions. However, the Leaving aside marginally controversial decisions, such as Jarvis v.
valuable and logical American pro tanto doctrines and rules of strict Rockdale Housing Association,23 these include in chronological order
interpretation in favour of giving effect to the bond in the case of commer- Hounslow L.B.C. v. Twickenham GardenDevelopments;24 Kayev. Hosier
cial sureties have to date regrettably not been applied in England. These & Dickinson;25 Trollope & Calls v. N. W. Metroplitan Hospital Board;26
had evolved as early as the 1920's in America and have been applied to City of Manchester v. Fram Gerrard;27 William Sindall v. N. W Thames
failures of compliance with notice requirements in bonds, to their general Regional Hospital Board;28 Rayack Construction Ltd. v. Lampeter Meat
interpretation, and to the rules of release due to alterations of the debtor's Co. Ltd.;29 E.R. Dye Ltd. v. Simon Build/Peter Lind Partnership; 30 North
obligations, however trivial, under the Holme v. Brunskill principle from RegionalHealthAuthorityv. Crouch; 31 Mitsuiv.Attorney General ofHong
which bondsmen have so unmeritoriously profited in the past. The Amer- Kong; 32 Scott Lithgow v. Secretary of State for Defence;33 and General
ican rule requires proof of real prejudice to the bondsman, and permits Surety & Guarantee Ltd. v. Trafalgar House Constructions Ltd.;34 and
release only pro tanto to the extent of proven loss. 21 The American rules Caledonia Ltd. v. Orbit Valve Co.34a
,' and principles were expressly approved and followed by the Supreme It should be noted that these are decisions of the English higher
Court of Canada (in a case of failure to give a notice resulting in no poss- judiciary and not of the often more experienced Official Referee judges. It
ible prejudice to the bondsman), in a very welcome decision in 1983. 22 is in fact a characteristic of the modem higher judiciary in England, par-
It seems inevitable that the English judiciary will eventually begin to ticularly those with a Commercial Law background, that frequent and
make use of these sensible and necessary rules of interpretation to defeat
the widespread and persistent evasion of their responsibilities by bond- lhSeepara.17.008.
smen, which to date the English courts have done little or nothing to resist. a (1987) 36 BLR48.
Chapter 17 dealing with Bonds and Guarantees represents an almost
24
(1971) Ch. 223 (Megarry J.).
25
[1972] 1 W.L.R.146 (H.L.).
total departure from the Tenth Edition and, making use of earlier and 20
[1973] 1 W.L.R. 601 (H.L.).
independent research undertaken for Chapter 19 of C.C.P.P. in 1986, 27
(1974) 6 BLR 70 (Kerr J.).
ZR [1977] 4 BLR 154 (H.L.).

29 (1979) 12 BLR 30 (Vinelott J.).

lll (1982) 23 BLR 23 (Nolan J.).
19 See Chap. 17, Section 3. Ji [1984] Q.B. 644 (C.A.), dicta only.
2llGeneral Surety and Guaranty Ltd. v. Trafalgar House Constructions Ltd. (1994). C.A. 32
(1986) 33 BLR 1 (P.C.).
33
Report awaited. (1989) 45 BLR 6 (H.L.).
21 See paras. 17·033, 17·040, and 17-047-8 in Chap. 17. "(1994) 66 BLR 42 (C.A.).
12 Citadel Assurance v. Johns-Mansville Canada [1983] 1 S.C.R. 513. 34
' [1994] 1 W.L.R. 221 (Hobhouse J.)
xviii GENERAL INTRODUCTION AND PREFACE GENERAL INTRODUCTION AND PREFACE xix

almost effusive tribute is paid to the alleged priority of what is called of the government's own GC/Wks/1 contract, which did give reasonable
"business common sense" in interpreting commercial documents, and commercial protection to the budgetary interests of the owner. Increased
also to Cardozo J.'s famous "genesis and aim of the transaction" phrase budgetary constraints over recent years seem to have made no difference
when interpreting commercial documents, 35 while simultaneously arriv- whatever in this respect, in spite of the fact that the RIBA/JCT and ICE
ing at extraordinarily strict and legalistic constructions of commercial standard forms have themselves progressively increased, with almost
documents. every revision, the exposure of owners to post-contract claims for
In the Preface and Introduction to the Tenth Edition I cited a number of additional payment of uncertain extent carrying no counter-balancing
criticisms made by the judiciary of standard form draftsmanship in commercial advantage for the owner, destroying budgetary cetainty, and
England. Later comments by Parker L.J. in England in 1980 and by Smart damaging the industry in the long-term by placing a premium on claims
J. in New South Wales in 1989, as well as an excoriating passage by rather than on construction skills. No private owner, properly advised,
Menzies J. in the High Court of Australia about a long-used public auth- could afford to give producers such :financial protections against pricing
ority contract used for at least 60 years in Australia, are cited in Chapter 1 risk, nor expose himself to the price manipulation permitted by the stan-
of the Eleventh Edition, where a new section has now been included deal- dard form and standard method measurement systems; but it seems that
ing solely with the question of interpretation of contracts in general and of public owners and government departments have been content to fill any
construction contracts in particular,36 but on the whole judicial criticism at gap left by departing private users of the forms.
the present day seems, for whatever reason, more muted (see the further A summary of deficiencies, from the owner's point of view, of the
discussion infra). It should be added that, even when not assisted by clear RIBA/JCT and ICE standard forms is now indicated at some length in
instructions or, as call happen, instructions are given to leave in place ex- Chapter 2, under the (by no means accidental) rubric of the duty owed by
isting unsatisfactory draftsmanship, in spite of being pointed out by the A/Es to their clients ·when recommending an appropriate form of
draftsman ( usually because agreement between opposed influences on contract.38
the drafting body cannot be reconciled) standard form draftsmanship is In my view advisers, both legal and technical, who allow the use of
nevertheless frequently distinguished by sheer incompetence- how else,
either of these two major current standard forms in England by their
for example, could a recent new provision included in the ICE conditions
clients without either drastic amendment, or at the very least sufficient
giving contractors a right to interest on unpaid interim certificates fail to
warning of the budgetary and other financial risks to which they expose an
make clear whether certified sums remaining unpaid were only intended,
owner, must themselves be incurring risk in modern increasingly litigious
or whether undercertified sums should also qualify?37 These consider-
ations increase the need for a well-informed understanding of the practi- climates.
cal background to construction contracts if correct interpretations of the
contracts themselves are to be arrived at, and for this reason the degree of Objectives of Hudson
exposition and explanation of the technical and commercial background
to construction contracts has been consciously expanded in the Eleventh Since becoming editor, it has been my main object to produce a book on
Edition. the law and interpretation of construction contracts which is, first and
above all, comprehensible to architects, engineers, contractors, construc-
tion owners and public officers of government departments alike, many of
The English Standard Forms
whom will not be lawyers, as well as for lawyers who may be unfamiliar
In the last edition, and in my Preface and Introdu<;:tion to C.C.P.P. in with construction contracts and, perhaps more importantly because of the
1986, I expressed my continuing surprise that the British Government, as poor quality of their draftsmanship, with the practical and commercial
direct (if not indirect) providers of :finance for such a vast field of public background of the projects and of their various participants on which the
construction, appeared to show little or no interest in its various depart- contracts are intended to exercise control.
ments to the value-for-money aspects of the private sector standard forms, Construction law is now also beginning to attract the attention of uni-
which have been allowed progressively to penetrate the English public versities and academic institutions and centres of construction law in
bodies generating major construction such as, first, local and highway au- many countries. Both from the point of view of academics and students as
thorities, and later the hospital boards) in spite of the existence in England well as of judiciaries, and also of those legal practitioners in need of valid
arguments where their clients find themselves in difficult or anomalous
15
Compare the passage from Lord Diplock in The Antaios, and from Lord Wilberforce in situations under existing forms, as well as in a growing number of cases
Prenn v. Simmonds, quoted in Chap. 1, para. 1-217. where ad hoc and not standard form contracts are involved, it is in my view
Jo See Chap. 1, Section 9. .,
31
See Secretary of State for Transport v. Birse-Farr Joint Venture (1992) 62'.BLR 36, para.
8·100. 38 See Section 6(2)(j), paras. 2· 167 et seq.
 xx GENERAL INTRODUCTION AND PREFACE GENERAL INTRODUCTION AND PREFACE xxi

very important that discussion of the law should not become too domi- Structure of the Eleventh Edition
nated by the contents of what may often be inadequately drafted current
standard forms which themselves are, in any event, subject to frequent The basic structure of the Tenth Edition and -the division of its Chapters
change and to the shifting influences of the interested parties concerned in have not been changed, but I have thought it important to explain rather
their formulation. There is a real danger, moreover, that the continued more often the history and practical or commercial background to com-
prevalence of particular provisions in a standard form over_ many years monly-found contractual provisions, to identify anomalies and suggest
will eventually begin to acquire an unanalysed respectability and be improvements or alternative solutions to problems where necessary.
treated by judiciaries, as a consequence of their familiarity, as a reason- . I have continued the policy of using illustrations, always a special fea-
able norm to be implied in response to business or economic efficacy, in ture of Hudson, in which I believe strongly as a vitally important aid to
the absence of similar wording in other contracts. readability and understanding, for lawyers as well as for laymen, and
In view of the great increase in reported material and the drafting of which in my opinion amply repays the additional text involved, though, in
new forms of contract in many countries, together with the considerable the interests of space, illustrations have now been included in much
intervention of legislatures in many countries, a survey of this expanding smaller print. The text of illustrations is often deliberately very free, for
and changing field, and the selection of material in order to explain the reasons which I pointed out-in the Introduction to the 1979 Supplement,
basic principles of interpretation of construction contracts, while at the and does not necessarily follow closely the headnotes or language of the
same time not becoming unduly tied to the detail of .current standard cases as reported, but is designed to simplify and illustrate principle, or to
forms, is not an easy task. Moreover, I am only too aware that with such a draw attention to possibly significant elements not emphasised in the
wide coverage there will be many and important omissions which my own report itself. I have also continued to retain nearly all of the nineteenth
reading as an individual practitioner will have failed to note. Indeed, in the century case law, which I have increasingly realised compares well, in the
light of the foregoing paragraphs of this Introduction, my own reaction on simplicity and common sense of its judgments, with the often much longer
reviewing the emerging manuscripts of the Eleventh Edition has been and more complicated modem judgments, absorbed as they so often
close to that of England's most famous soldier reviewing his troops before become with the procedural or legal technicalities being advanced by
battle: "They may not frighten the enemy, but by God they terrify me." I modern litigants and their advisers. This link with the historical past of
repeat most earnestly my previous requests that practitioners in all coun- construction law has not only always given me great pleasure, but is likely
tries should not hesitate to notify Sweet & Maxwell or myself of any errors in my opinion to be of increasing value given the wayward tendencies of
or omissions which may be found in the Eleventh Edition. some jud~ciaries in the face of the blandishments and arguments resulting
As a source of new cases I have found particularly helpful the Building from the strong industry or interested pressures often brought to bear in
Law Reports in England (BLR) and the Australian Construction Law modem construction litigation.
Reporter (A.C.L.R.). I should like to record my particular appreciation of The result is a book, as before, of 18 chapters. One small earlier chapter
the unusual editorial selective skill first of Mr. Peter Bryant and now Mr. ( Chapter 4 on Special Parties) had outlived its usefulness and has been
John Murrary in identifying valuable and interesting cases in A.C.L.R. discarded, but a wholly new chapter (Chapter 15, Insurance and Indemni-
I have found their selections both useful and stimulating, in contrast to ties), considers two associated subjects of obvious and increasing import-
1:'
11 much over-reporting which often goes on in unofficial construction ance which had previously been dealt with only incidentally in the old
ii reports elsewhere. I regret that time considerations have prevented my Chapter 5, Performance (now Chapter 4). Regrettably, although I have
' endeavoured to avoid it, production considerations associated with the
using in any detail the Canadian or any other Australian or, indeed,
i/ English specialist reports, but this is no reflection upon them, merely on need to expand the book into two volumes, have resulted in a few of the
I my own industry. If I may digress for a moment on this point, I consider it Chapters being re-numbered. The total text and illustrations are some-
to be of great importance that the official or semi-official law reporting what more than three times as long as the Tenth Edition, but due to
i bodies in all the Commonwealth countries should not cease to report con- smaller print the total number of pages of text has approximately doubled
struction cases, which under budgetary restraints the e:Xistence of special- (to somewhat over 1,700 pages).
:1
ist and often privately financed reporting entitities might tempt them to Turning to some of the individual Chapters, Chapter 1 was originally
I do. They should remember that library availability is an important factor designed by me in earlier editions with readers who were not legally quali-
for writers or researchers seeking to examine the law in other jurisdic- fied principally in mind. In its present form it contains an initial 142 pages
tions. Moreover, the editorial and analytical quality of official or semi- devoted to the general principles of contract law (including the new Sec-
official law reporting in most jurisdictions is, at least at present, usually tion 9 on Interpretation already mentioned), and it is hoped that it will
superior to that of the less formal privately funded specialist l'e'ports in the prove of value to lawyers as well. This is followed by a further 95 pages
construction field. dealing with quasi-contract and tort, a very considerable expansion on the
xxii GENERAL INTRODUCTION AND PREFACE GENERAL INTRODUCTION AND PREFACE xxiii

Tenth Edition, and reflecting the increased intervention of economic loss result) has been Code/fa Construction Ltd. v. Commissioners for Railways
liabilities of recent years into areas previously exclusively regulated by (1982)."
contract. In the Supreme Court of Canada, two very valuable landmark cases
Chapter 2, on architects and engineers, is also very substantial, being have been Eisley v. J. G. Collins Insurance Agencies43 in 1978 (liquidated
170 pages long and in the nature of a small textbook on their contracts of damages as a cap to common law damages) and Citadel Assurance v.
employment and their liabilities to their clients. Johns-Mansville Canada44 (United States rules for commercial sureties'
Chapter 4, a major chapter 210 pages long, covers the principal obli- bonds). In the same oustanding category must be the New South Wales
gations of contractor and owner, but also, as did its predecessor Chapter 5 Court of Appeal's judgments in Renard Constructions Ltd. v. Minister of
in the Tenth Edition, discharge by breach or frustration; so far as owner/ Public Worksv. Leighton Contractors Ltd. (1992) (requirement of reason-
contractor obligations are concerned, it may be regarded as the heart of ableness on owner's termination); 45 the South African Appellate Div-
the book. The treatment of repudiation and frustration has been very con- ision's judgments in Grinaker Construction Ltd. v. Transvaal Provincial
siderably expanded. Administration in 198246 (remeasurement under FIDIC contract, better
As previously indicated, a wholly new Chapter 15 (Insurance and reasoned and more persuasive than the Privy Council's contrary decision
Indemnities) is now included, and Chapters 16 (Bankruptcy and Liqui- on slightly different but for relevant purposes identical wording in Mitsui
dation), Chapter 17 (Guaranty and Surety), and Chapter 18 (Arbitration) v. Attorney General of Hong Kong (1986);" White J.'s remarkable judg-
have been entirely re-written. Chapter 18, at 156 pages, is somefourtimes ment in the Full Court of South Australia in 1982 in Egan v. State Trans-
the length of its predecessor in the Tenth Edition, and is intended as a port Authority persuasively disapproving and not following Banbury
minor textbook for use alongside Mustill & Boyd, with certain aspects Railway v. Daniel (interim payment and ownership of plant) and correct-
relevant to construction disputes dealt with more expansively. ing the Tenth Edition in that regard, as well as making an analytical contri-
Finally, exigencies of production have required the Index to be pro- bution of the greatest value on inflation and its effect on damages )48;
fessionally prepared externally, I am sure very efficiently, but unavoidably White J. 's further re:markable judgment in 1990 in the Full Court in South
without the advantages of the personal insight of the author of the text in Australian Superannuation Fundv. Leighton Contractors, 49 (of very great
an already very specialist field. I hope, therefore, to incorporate a prob- value in the increasingly important field of securing proper particularlisa-
ably more idiosyncratic author's index in a future Supplement which will tion of claims in construction arbitrations); the valuable and stimulating
also serve to remedy some of the omissions or inadequacies of treatment decision of the Queensland Court of Appeal in Kratzmann Holdings Ltd.
of the later cases reported during the fairly lengthy period of gestation of v. University of Queensland50 in 1982 (forfeiture of retention moneys not a
this Edition. penalty); and Brooking J.'s judgment in the Victoria Full Court in SMK
Cabinets v. Hili Modern Electrics Ltd. in 198451 (late variations and exten-
sion of time). Finally, I should mention the valuable and important judg-
The Commonwealth Judiciaries
ment of Fitzgerald P. in Iezzi Constructions Ltd. v. Currumbin Crest
As in the Preface and Introduction to the Tenth Edition, and as in the Development Ltd52 in the Queensland Court of Appeal in 1994 ("Pay
1979 Supplement, I would wish to repeat my earlier tributes, now even when paid" provisions, repudiation of sub-contract and quantum meruit)
more strongly felt, to the quite exceptional if not superior quality of Com- unfortunately received too late for illustration and discussion in the text of
monwealth and overseas judgments in the construction field, and the very Chapter 1, Section 11.
great assistance which they have given to me in seeking to provide a coher- Turning to the many well-researched and well-informed first instance
ent and constructive commentary on Construction Law, particularly in judgments which have been of particular assistance to me, I would include
the face of a number of difficult English decisions since 1970 to which I Marks J.'s judgment in Victoria in Gas & Fuel Corporation ofVictortia v.
have previously referred in this Introduction.
Thus the decisions of the High Court of AustraliainShire ofSutherlandv. •2 (1982) 149 C.LR. 337.
Heyman (1985);" Pavey and Matthews Ltd. v. Paul (1987);"' and " (1978) 83 D.L.R. (3d) !.
Hungerford Ltd. v. Walker (1989) 41 are, of course, of seminal importance " [1983] 1 S.C.R. 513.
4s [1992] 26 N.S.W.L.R. 234.
in the development of the common law as a whole. The one High Court 4E [1982] 1 S.A.L.R. 78.
case creating any difficulty (and then only as to the chosen basis of its 47 (1986) 33 BLR 1.

48 [1982} 3 S.A.S.R. 481.

49 {1990) 55 S.A.S.R. 327.

>9 (1985) 157 C.L.R. 424. ~ {1982} Qd. R. 682.

40 (1987) 162 C.L.R. 221. SJ (1984] V.R. 391.

"(1989) 63 A.L.J.R. 210. ~ (1994) 13 A.C.L.R. 29.

xxiv GENERAL INTRODUCTION AND PREFACE GENERAL INTRODUCTION AND PREFACE xxv

Woodhall Ltd. (arbitrator's removal for misconduct)53 ; the two Ontario acquiring well-deserved popularity with litigants in the construction field
judgments of Houlden J. and Leary J. in Thomas Fuller Construction Ltd. and, if present trends continue, will in my view progressively attract more
v. Continental Insurance (notice to bondsman)54 and in Ellis-Don Ltd. v. business (through the removal by owners of arbitration clauses from dom-
Parking Authority of Toronto ( owner's duty to obtain excavation per- estic construction contracts, leaving arbitration only for ad hoc disputes
mission)55 respectively; Hunter J. in Hong Kong in Hsin Chong Construc- and agreement where it is genuinely desired by both parties after the dis-
tion v. Yaton Realty56 (persuasively not following Nourse J. in Re Arthur pute has arisen). In contrast to some of the difficulties I have previously
Saunders on express trusts on retention moneys); Hunt J. in New South expressed, I wish, on the contrary, to pay tribute to the Official Referee
Wales in Traynor Panan Constructions Ltd. (arbitrator misconduct)57; judges who in recent years have done so much to steer construction law in
Chao Hick Tin J.C. in Turner (East Asia) Ltd. v. Builders Federal Ltd. England relatively safely, with many valuable decisions now noted in
(arbitrator misconduct) 58; Thean J. in Singapore in Joo Yee Construction Hudson, in spite of the number of erratic and unpredictable higher
Ltd. v. Diethelm Industries Ltd. (payment direct of sub-contractors and judiciary interventions. Judges Sir William Stabb Q.C., E. S. Fay Q.C. and
insolvency, considering the British Eagle case),59 and Roper J. in Fern- lately John Newey Q.C. have presided in those courts givingjudgments of
brook Trading v. Taggart, 60 (time for extension of time decision. All the real and exceptional distinction. I would also applaud the robust justice-
above cases were difficult, and in my view the judgments not only fully and driven independence of thought and action consistently shown over a
informatively researched but showing a full appreciation of the construc- number of years by Judge Fox Andrews Q.C. and until illness and retire-
tion background and reaching valuable and correct conclusions. ment, by Judge John Davies Q.C.
It is also refreshing to find a forthrightness of comment overseas which
seems largely to have deserted the English courts in the construction field American Readers
since 1970. Thus one of the few judges in any jurisdiction prepared to For the benefit of American readers, I should make clear that this book
protest eloquently at the sacrifice of justice involved in the Nema-style is not remotely, of course, an attempt to cover the vast, perhaps too vast,
philosophies restricting appeal from arbitrators was Kirby P., in a dissent- areas of United States construction case law. Hudson is essentially an
ingjudgmentin the New South Wales Court of Appeal in 1988. 61 Again, an examination of the principles to be applied in all interpretation of con-
almost romantic account of the pricing techniques and aspirations of con- struction contracts in all common law systems, and of the remedies avail-
tractors tendering to public authorities in measured contracts by Lord able for thc!ir enforcement. In the preponderant areas where the law is
Bridge in Mitsui v. Attorney General of Hong Kong should be read along- broadly the same, I have felt no need to refer to United States law. Where
side the blunt and experienced account of the price manipulation prac- it appears to differ, I have endeavoured to point this out, and most cer-
ticed by tendering contractors in such situations by Brooking J. in the Full tainly so in cases where United States law offers answers to problems or
Court of Victoria in the Sist Constructions case. 62 Home truths such as that seems to be an improvement on the current state of English and Common-
of Lloyd L.J. in the English Court of Appeal in the recentMcAlpine Hum- wealth construction law (for example,pro tanto enforcement of commer-
beroak case in 1992: "It seems to be the practice in the construction indus- cial sureties' bonds). My principal aim in looking at the much greater mass
try to employ consultants to prepare a claim almost as soon as the ink on of reported United States case law was to find assistance in everyday fac-
the contract is dry", 63 and Parker L.J. 's "Topsy" account of standard form tual situations on construction projects where the relatively limited
draftsmanship,64 are now unfortunately only too rare. A few more of such English and Commonwealth reporting had not as yet thrown up an exam-
judicial noses above the parapet would be very welcome. ple, and also to see if the less rigid attachment to old doctrines and more
I would not wish it to be thought that I am in the least critical of the innovatory approach to new situations of the United States courts might
quality of the English Official Referee specialist courts, which are rapidly help in arguing for change in our own case-law or draftsmanship of con-
struction contracts. Typical areas where United States law has been
noticed include "pay when paid" sub-contracts, "total cost" presentation
s; [1978] V.R. 385.
" (1973) 36 D.L.R. (3d) 336.
of claims, acceleration claims, fixed overhead recovery, pro tanto
"(1978) 28 BLR 98 (English). interpretation and enforcement of commercial surety's contracts, the
,;o (1986) 40 BLR 119. duties (if any) owed in tort by architects or engineers to safeguard con-
7
1 (1988) 7 A.C.L.R. 47. tractors from economic loss, "convenience" termination clauses, and "no
5~ (1988) 44 BLR 128.
·1g (1990) 2 M.L.J. 66.
damage" clauses. A number of the historical and seminal American con-
60 [1979] 1 N.Z.L.R. 556.
struction cases are also referred to from time to time.
~1 Quoted, Cha.18, para.18·024. I would hope that the Eleventh Edition will prove of value to United
62
Quoted Chap. 8, para. 8·010. ..
04
McAlpine Humberoak Ltd. v. McDermott International Inc. (1992) 58 BLR'i, 24. States practitioners who try construction cases and need arguments, or
M Quoted Chap. 1, para. 1 ·218. who are involved in advising on overseas or international construction
 xxvi GENERAL INTRODUCTION AND PREFACE

projects, as well as to students or academics interested in the basic prin-

ciples of draftsmanship or interpretation of construction contracts. There
are certainly some areas, such as the law on the practicability or "build-
ability" of the owner's design, on which American jurisprudence has Articles by the Editor referred to in the text reproduced in 1986 as individ·
wavered uncertainly, and on which comparison with the Commonwealth ual chapters in C.C.P.P (Construction Contracts: Principles and Policies
case law could be of benefit to American law. in Tort and Contract, Sweet & Maxwell, 1986)

l.N. Duncan Wallace Q.C. Corresponding

Articles, etc., Chapter in
Atkin Chambers reference C.C.P.P. Titles Subject Matter
1 Atkin Building
Grays Inn
London WClR SEQ (1973) 89 L.Q.R. Chapter 14 Set Back to Set Off Critique of
36 Dawnays Ltd.
Acknowledgements v. Minter and of
six later cases
I would like particulatly to acknowledge my debt to Boalt Hall School (1974) 90 L.Q.R. Chapter 15 Set Fair for Set Off Critique of
of Law at the University of California at Berkeley, for the hospitality and 21 Modern
facilities provided to me successively over the years since 1977 by Deans Engineering v.
Kadish, Choper and Kay. I am particularly grateful to Professor Justin Gilbert Ash
Sweet, who sponsored my original invitation to Boalt, and to Tom Rey- (1975) 91 L.Q.R. Chapter 16 The Mottram case Critique of
nolds, whose expertise as a professional librarian is unrivalled and who 471 Mottram v.
has been a never failing source of help to me. I am also grateful to Pro~ Bernard Sunley
fessor John Fleming, whose fine intellect during these years of the advance (1977) 93 L.Q.R. Chapter 1 A New Path for Preview of Anns
of tort into the construction field has been a constant stimulus. 16 Negligence v. Merton
I must also thank Mrs Freda Broderick who, first at Lincoln's Inn and (1978) 94 L.Q.R. Chapter2 Tort Demolishes Critique of Anns
then at Atkin Chambers, has borne the burden of typing this massive 60 Contract in New v. Merton
ii manuscript over the years with unflagging energy and remarkable skill Construction
and a wonderful tolerance and cheerfulness. So, too, Ms. Liz Duke at Ber- (1978) 94 L.Q.R. Chapter3 Negligence v. Critique of Batty
keley, who carried the burden during so many summers, and who, like me, 331 Economic Loss v. Metropolitan
must have wondered whether it would ever end. Property
I mu.st also express especially warm thanks to a small band of faithful
(1984-1985) 1 Chapter 5 Liability in Tort of Survey of new
correspondents who have helped me keep in touch with developments Const. L.J. 4 Construction cases up to
overseas. Foremost and most regular of these has been Mr. Ian Barnett of Professionals 1984, and of
Chatswood, New South Wales. But I am also very indebted to Mr. U.S. and
Maurice O'Brien Q.C. of Wellington, New Zealand, to Mr. F.C. Kirk- Canadian cases
Cohen S.C., now Kirk-Cohen J. of South Africa, to Mr. Robert Smellie on professional
liability
:! Q.C. of Auckland, New Zealand, now Smellie J., and, more recently, to
(1984-1985) 1 Chapter 6 The Peabody Case Critique of
Mr. John Singleton Q.C. of Vancouver. I would also like to mention my
tutor at Oriel College, Oxford in 1946, later to become Sir Zelman Cowen, Const. L.J. 176 Peabody
Donation Fund
Governor-General of Australia and later still Provost of Oriel, who did Case
much to bend my mind back into the ways of the law after my return, like
himself, from the navy in 1946; and also my pupil/master the late Judge (1986) 31.C.L.R. Chapter 7 The Shire of Critique of Shire
157 Sutherland Case of Sutherland v.
Gwynne R.F. Morris Q.C., who gave me and a small band of contem- in Australia Heyman
poraries, including Andrew Lyell, the late Judge Eric McLellan and Judge
Leo Clark Q.C., such a fine grounding in the art and understanding of (1985) 21.C.L.R. Chapter 18 The Time Bar in Time bars on
330 FIDICCl.67 arbitration
pleadings and their importance in 1947 and 1948.
including ICE
arbitration
clause
xxvii
xxviii PRE-1996 ARTICLES

Corresponding
Articles, etc., Chapter in
reference C.C.P.P. Titles Subject Matter

Post-1986 articles by the editor referred to in the text

(1986) 2 Const. Chapter 17 The Architect, the Critique of
L.J. 13 Arbitrator and N.R.H.A.v.
the Courts Crouch
Articles, etc.,
Construction reference
Ltd. Title Subject matter

(1984) 3 A.C.L.R. Chapter 21 The Jennings Case Critique of

2 in the High Jennings (1987) 3 Const. L.J. 3 How Much Critique of Mitsui v.
Court of Construction Measurement? A.-G. of Hong Kong
Australia case.
Nominated (1987) 3 Const. L.J.172 Interim Certificates: Critique of Lubenham
sub-contract Another Heresy? Fidelities case
repudiation and
the Bickerton (1987) 3 Const. L.J. 274 The Bickerton Critique of Jarvis v.
case (see also Albatross Once More Rockdale Housing
Chapter20) Association
(1983) 11.C.L.R. Chapters 23 Construction Advice to owners (1988) 4 Const. L.J. 100 The Lump and the Critique of D&F Estates
16 and24 Contracts from on selection Landlord as Exists case in the Court of
(1984) 11.C.L.R. } the Owner's and drafting of fromAnns Appeal
323 Point of View, contracts (1989) 105 L.Q.R. 46 Confusion Confounded: Critique of D&F estates
and Industrial Negligences and
Plant Contracts case in House of
Defective Buildings Lords
(1990) 106 L.Q.R. 11 Negligence and Further note on D&F
Complex Structures Estates case
(1990) 6 Arb. Int. 253 Control by the Courts; a Critique of the Nema
Plea for More and philosophy in the field
Not Less of construction
contract arbitrations
(1991) 7 Arb. Int. 149 Deficiences of Current Criticism of trends in
International conduct of
Arbitration Practice construction
arbitrations both
domestic and
international
(1990) 6 Const. L.J. 87 Defective Work: The Standard form and
New Flavours by-law deficiencies
and quality assurance
inadequate remedies
for a serious problem
(1990) 6 Const. L.J. 207 Charter for the Critique of Pacific
Construction Associates v. Baxter
Professional
(1991) 7 Const. L.J. 3 "Beyond the Critique of Scott
Contractor's Control" Lithgow v. Secretary
of State for Defence
(1991) 107 L.Q.R. 228 Anns Beyond Repair Critique of Murphy v.
Brentwood D.C.
xxix
xxx PosT-1986 ARTICLES

Articles, etc,,
reference Title Subject matter

TABLE OF CONTENTS
(1991) 7 Const. L.J. 45 Two Singapore Critique of Tropicon
Decisions and Joo Yee cases
(1992) 11 A.C.L.R. 1 Common Law Survey of Anns,
Developments Murphy, Hedley-
Applicable to New Byrne, Pacific VOLUMEl
Construction Associates and
Edgeworth
Construction cases Contents Page
Dedication ..................................................................................................... v
(1993) 1993 Tort L.R. Negligence and Survey of laws of tort as
General Introduction and Preface ............................................................ vii
152 Economic Loss: a in 1993 in the
View of the Future construction contract Table of Cases ............................................................................................ xlv
Table of Statutes ...................................................................................... cxvii
(1993) 9 Const. L.J. 7 A Surprising Decision Critique of Colbart v. Table of Statutory Instruments ............................................................. cxxiii
Kumar
Rules of the Supreme Court ................................................................... cxxv
(1993) 109 L.Q.R. 82 Assignment of Rights to Critique of Linden Table of References to RIBA Contract Form Conditions ................ cxxvii
Sue for Breach of Gardens case in Court Table of References to ICE Contract Fonn Conditions ..................... cxxxi
Contract of Appeal

(1994) 110 L.Q.R. 42 Assignment of Rights to Critique of Linden

Sue: Half a Loaf Gardens case in the Para.
House of Lords

(1994) 10 Const. L.J. House of Commons in Critique of Trafalgar 1. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF LAW
190 the Court of Appeal: House Ltd. v. General
On Demand Per Surety in Court of Definitions and Background ................................................................. 1·001
Incuriam Appeal Section 1. Classification of Contracts.................................................. 1·014
Section 2. Formation of a Simple Contract
(1) Elements of a Simple Contract ................................................ 1-017
(2) Offer ............................................................................................ 1·018
(3) Withdrawal of an Offer and Counter-offer............................ 1-023
(4) Death of Offerer or Offeree .................................................... 1-030
(5) Acceptance................................................................................. 1-032
(6) Agreements to Agree and Vagueness.................................... 1·042
(7) Agreements "Subject to Contract" ......................................... 1-057
(8) Consideration
(a) Generally......................................................................... 1·061
(b) Accord and satisfaction................................................. 1-071
(c) Forbearance to sue ......................................................... 1·079
(d) Collateral agreements with third parties ..................... 1-080
(9) Intention to Create Legal Relations ....................................... 1-081
Section 3. Contracts Under Seal
(1) Generally.................................................................................... 1-085
(2) Contracts with Local Authorities ............................................ 1-088
Section 4. Variation of Contracts........................................................ 1·089
Section 5. Void and Voidable Contracts
(1) Generally.................................................................................... 1-092

xxxi
xxxii TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS xxxiii

(2) Mistake (2) Money Had and Received ........................................................ 1·261

(a) Of fact .............................................................................. 1·094 (3) Quantum Meruit ........................................................................ 1·263
(b) Common mistake........................................................... 1·096 Section 12. Liability in Tort
(c) Unilateral mistake .......................................................... 1·097 (1) Generally .................................................................................... 1·273
(d) .Parties mistaking each other......................................... 1·099 (2) The Principle in Hedley Byrne v. Heller
(e) Non estfactum ................................................................ 1·100 (a) Generally ......................................................................... 1·280
(3) Rectification ............................................................................... 1·109 (b) Application in construction projects ............................ 1·290
(4) Misrepresentation (c) Owner/sub-contractor situations .................................. 1·291
(a) Generally ......................................................................... l ·127 (d) Contractor/NE situations ............................................. 1·293
(b) Misrepresentation defined ............................................ 1·128 (i) Design ............................................................... 1·295
(c) Summary ofpre-1967 law .............................................. J.131 (ii) Supervision and temporary works ................ l ·297
(d) Summary of the Misrepresentation Act 1967 ............. J.132 (iii) Certification ..................................................... 1·302
(e) The Hedley Byrne liability ............................................ J.134 (iv) Liability of A/Es to contractors
(f) The law as modified by the Act of 1967 ...................... J.140 in United States Law ...................................... 1·305
(g) Fraudulent misrepresentation ...................................... 1· 162 (v) Liability of AJEs to contractors
(h) Exclusion of liability for misrepresentation ................ 1·165 in Canada ...................................................... 1·306A
(i) Exclusion and effect of the Misrepresentation (e) Limitation ........................................................................ 1·307
Act 1967, s.3 .................................................................... 1·172 (3) Liability Under the Principle of Donoghue v. Stevenson
Section 6. Implied Terms (a) Generally ......................................................................... 1·308
(1) General Principles ..................................................................... 1·179 (b) Application to construction contracts ......................... 1·310
(2) Application to Building and Engineering Contracts ............ 1·186 (c) Proximity and economic loss limits .............................. 1·322
(3) Implied Covenant for Good Faith and Fair Dealing ............ 1·197 (d) Disclaimers and "contract structure" or "contract
Section 7. Custom and Trade Usage setting" exemptions ........................................................ 1·325
(1) Generally .................................................................................... 1·200 (4) The Occupiers' Liability Acts 1957 and 1984
(2) Incorporation of Usage ............................................................. 1·202 (a) Generally .........................•................................................ 1·328
(b) Application to construction contracts
(3) Admissibility of Evidence of Trade Usage ............................ 1·204
Section 8. Collateral Agreements ........................................................ 1·208
(i) As between owner and contractor ................ 1·330
(ii) As between the main contractor and
Section 9. Interpretation
sub-contractor .................................................. 1·331
(1) General Rules ............................................................................ 1·215
(2) More Specific Rules (iii) As.between non-contracting parties ............. 1·332
(5) Strict Liability ............................................................................ 1·337
(a) Subsequent conduct... .................................................... 1·222
(a) Rylands v. Fletcher ......................................................... 1-388
(b) Deletions ......................................................................... 1·223
(b) Nuisance .......................................................................... 1·339
(c) Contrapreferentumrule ................................................ 1·224 (c) Trespass ........................................................................... 1·340
(d) Priority of documents (d) Withdrawal of support... ................................................ l ·343
(i) General rule ..................................................... 1·225 (6) Liability Under the Anns Principle
(ii) Express provisions for priority ...................... 1·226 (a) Generally ......................................................................... 1·345
(3) "Discrepancy and Divergence" Provisions ............................ 1·229 (b) The limitation problem .................................................. 1·347
(4) Exemption Clauses .................................................................... 1·231 (c) Application of the Anns Principle
(5) Indemnity Clauses ..................................................................... 1·234 (i) To whom duty owed ....................................... 1·350
(6) Other Clauses ............................................................................ 1·236 (ii) Applications ofprinciple ................................ 1·351
(7) The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 ..................................... 1·238 (iii) Principle not applicable .................................. 1·352
Section 10. Estoppel and Waiver (d) The Heyman and D. & F Estates and Murphy cases
(1) Estoppel... ................................................................................... 1·246 (i) Heyman's case., ............................................... 1·353
(2) Estoppel Per Rem Judicatem ................................................... 1·250 (ii) The D. & F. Estates case ................................. 1·354
(3) Waiver and Equitable Estoppel .............................................. 1·255 (iii) Combined effect of the two cases .................. l ·356
Section 11. Quasi-contractual Liability (iv) Effect of Murphy v. Brentwood District
(1) Quasi-contract Generally ......................................................... 1·260 Council ............................................................. 1·357
 xxxiv TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS xxxv

(7) Defective Premises Act 1972 ................................................... 1·361 Section 6. Duties and Liabilities of Architects and Engineers
(8) Latent Damage Act 1986.......................................................... 1·364 to Employer
(9) Consumer Protection Act 1987................................................ 1·370 (1) Generally
(10) Concurrent Liability in Contract and Tort (a) Nature of duty................................................................. 2·083
(a) Generally ......................................................................... 1·372 (b) Standard of care ............................................................. 2·086
(b) Contributory negligence ................................................ 1·377 (2) Duties in Detail
(c) Contributions between defendants .............................. 1 ·379 (a) Design
(i) A/Es' supervision ............................................ 1·383 (i) Degree of care ................................................. 2·099
(ii) The "contract setting" or "contract (ii) Continuing duty and limitation ..................... 2· 108
structure" ......................................................... 1·386 (iii) Measure of damage ......................................... 2· 111
(11) Vicarious Liability and Independent Contracts .................... 1·387 (iv) Delegation ........................................................ 2·114
Section 13. Economic Duress .............................................................. 1 ·390 (b) Examination of site ........................................................ 2· 124
(c) Delivery of drawings, information and instructions
in tiine .............................................................................. 2·130
2. ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS (d) Instructions as to methods of working and
temporary works ............................................................ 2· 138
Section 1. Need for Employment ........................................................ 2·001 (e) Special duties in regard to nominations ...................... 2·144
Section 2. Definitions and Qualifications ( f) Knowledge of legislation, building regulations,
(1) Architects ................................................................................... 2·006 by-laws and rights of adjoining owners ........................ 2· 146
(2) Engineers .................................................................................... 2·016 (g) Excess of cost over estimates ........................................ 2· 156
(3) "In House" or "Associate" Architects and Engineers ......... 2·020 (h) Preparation of quantities ............................................... 2·161
(4) Professional Assistants and Clerks of Work .......................... 2·023 (i) Recommending builders ................................................ 2· 165
(5) Quantity Surveyors ................................................................... 2·031 (j) Recommending form of contract ................................. 2· 167
(6) Structural Engineers ................................................................. 2·035 (k) Supervision ...................................................................... 2·182
(7) Project Managers ....................................................................... 2·037 (1) Administration of contract ............................................ 2· 198
Section 3. Contract of Employment (m) Comprehensive design ................................................... 2·202
(1) Generally .................................................................................... 2·041 (n) Surveys
(2) Form of Appointment .............................................................. 2·043 (i) Liability ............................................................ 2·203
(3) Conditions of Appointment.. ................................................... 2·044 (ii) Measure of damage ......................................... 2·205
(4) Duration and Termination of Appointment .......................... 2·049 (3) Quasi-judicial Duties ................................................................ 2·214
(5) Death, Bankruptcy or Inability to Act of the Architect or (4) Negligence in Certifying ........................................................... 2.218
Engineer ..................................................................................... 2·054 (5) Limitation ................................................................................... 2·222
(6) Death or Bankruptcy of Building Owner. .............................. 2·056 Section 7. Duties and Liabilities of Quantity Surveyors
Section 4. Authority of the Architect and Engineer (1) Bills of Quantities Defined ....................................................... 2·223
(1) Generally ............................................................................ ,....... 2·057 (2) Preparation of Bills and Other Duties .................................... 2·228
(2) As to Waiver of Contractual Requirements of Building Section 8. Fraud and Bribery
Contract ...................................................................................... 2·058 (1) Fraud ........................................................................................... 2·232
(3) As to Contract or Variations ................................................... 2·061 (2) Bribes and Secret Commissions .............................................. 2·233
(4) As to taking out Bills of Quantities ........................................ 2·069 Section 9. Remuneration of Architects, Engineers and
(5) As to Measurement and Valuation of Variations ................. 2·072 Quantity Surveyors
(6) As to Employment of Engineering or Other Consultants ... 2·074 (1) For Completed Services
(7) Express Powers under Building and Engineering (a) By special contract ......................................................... 2·237
Contracts .................................................................................... 2·078 (i) The size of the total percentage fee itself ..... 2·239
(8) Effect of Restrictions as between Owner and Architect ...... 2·079 (ii) The degree of "front-loading" of the earlier
Section 5. Rights of Contractor when Architect or Engineer instalments .................................. ;.................... 2·240
Exceeds Authority (iii) Total cost on which the percentage fee is
(1) Warranty of Authority ................................................ :,,; .......... 2·080 calculated ......................................................... 2·241
(2) Measure of Damages for Breach of Warranty .......... :............ 2·081 (iv) Consultants ...................................................... 2·242
 xxxvi TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS xxxvii

(v) Specialist sub-contractors or suppliers (a) Contracts employing schedules of prices ..................... 3·043
responsible for design ..................................... 2·243 (b) Contracts on a cost-plus basis ....................................... 3·045
(vi) Supervision generally...................................... 2·244 Section 2. Incorporation of Documents .............................................. 3·048
(b) Implication of reasonable remuneration ..................... 2·247 Section 3. Acceptance of Tender
(c) Work done on approval and probationary drawings. 2·249 (1) Legal Effect of Tender. ............................................................. 3·053
( d) Competition drawings .................................................... 2·251 (2) Whether Acceptance Creates Contract .................................. 3·054
( e) Amount of reasonable remuneration .......•.................. 2·255 (a) Acceptance of tender subject to condition
(2) For Uncompleted Services ....................................................... 2·260 (i) Conditions as to a formal contract ................ 3·055
(3) By Whom Remuneration Payable .......................................... 2·265 (ii) Conditions as to third party approval or
(4) Services Outside Building Contracts ...................................... 2·266 permission ........................................................ 3·060
(5) Charges for Settling Builders' Accounts ................................ 2·268 (iii) Other conditions .............................................. 3·062
(6) When the Right to Payment Arises ........................................ 2·269 (b) Parties not ad idem ......................................................... 3·066
(7) Retention of Plans and Documents ........................................ 2·270 (c) Acceptance within reasonable time ............................. 3·068
(8) Ownership and Copyright of Plans and Documents (d) Commencement of work ............................................... 3·069
(a) Ownership ....................................................................... 2·272 (e) Letters of intent .............................................................. 3·071
(b) Copyright... ...................................................................... 2·273 (3) Withdrawal of Tender............................................................... 3·072
(i) Copyright of the buildings themselves ......... 2·274 (4) Tender for Such Work as Employer may Order ................... 3·073
(ii) Copyright of the plans and drawings of a Section 4. Liability Apart from Contract
building ............................................................. 2·275 (1) Cost of Tendering ...................................................................... 3·075
(9) Remuneration of Quantity Surveyors .................................... 2·283 (2) Misrepresentation ..................................................................... 3·077
Section 10. Liability for Quantity Surveyor's Fees (3) Bribery and Secret Commissions ............................................ 3·079
(1) Liability to Pay for Preparing Bills .......................................... 2·286 Section 5. Collusive Tendering ............................................................ 3·080
(2) Liability for Measuring Up ...................................................... 2·288 Section 6. Other Statutory Requirements .......................................... 3·082

3. TENDERS AND ESTIMATES 4. PERFORMANCE

Section 1. Types of Tender Documents Section 1. Obligations of the Contractor
(1) Documentation Generally ........................................................ 3·001 (1) Obligation to Complete ............................................................ 4·003
(a) Invitation to tender ........................................................ 3·003 (a) Entire contracts and substantial performance
(b) Tender ............................................................................. 3·006 (i) Completion of contract as a whole ................ 4·006
(c) Acceptance of tender ..................................................... 3·007 (ii) Substantial performance ................................ 4·014
( d) Later formal agreement ................................................. 3·008 (iii) Completion for purposes of interim
(e) Incorporation of terms or documents .......................... 3·009 payments .......................................................... 4·023
(2) Principal Categories of Priced Contracts ............................... 3·011 (iv) Contracts which are not entire ...................... 4·035
(a) "Fixed price" or "lump sum" contracts ....................... 3·012 (b) Extent of work included in obligation to
(b) Measured or bill of quantities contracts ...................... 3·014 complete: the "inclusive price" principle .................... 4·036
(c) "Schedule" contracts ...................................................... 3·015 (i) Indispensably necessary work expressly
( d) Mixed contracts .............................................................. 3·016 or impliedly included ...................................... 4·039
(3) Where Extent of Work is Known at Time of Contract (ii) Work contingently necessary to achieve
(a) Drawings ......................................................................... 3·018 completion ....................................................... 4·043
(b) Bills of quantities ............................................................ 3·019 (iii) Contractor's unqualified obligation to
(c) Specifications .................................................................. 3·022 complete: the United States position ............ 4·061
( d) Schedules of rates or prices ........................................... 3·024 (2) Obligations as .to Design and Quality of Materials and
(4) Non-traditional Contracts Work ........................................................................................... 4·063
(a) "Turnkey" or "design-and-build" contracts ................ 3·026 (a) Design and suitability
(b) "Management" contracts .................................... \,'. ...... 3·033 (i) Where there is reliance on the contractor .... 4·075
(5) Where Extent of Work Uncertain ........................................... 3·041 (ii) "Duty to warn" cases ...................................... 4·100
xxxviii TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS xxxix

(iii) Houses in the course of erection ................... 4.105 (ii} "Conditions", "conditions precedent" and
(iv) Nominated sub-contractor design ................. 4·108 "of the essence" obligations ........................... 4·211
(v) Express terms as to design, performance (iii) Non-fundamental breaches after notice ....... 4·212
or suitability ..................................................... 4· 111 (c) Need for clear and prompt election ............................. 4·213
(vi) By-laws obligations of contractor .................. 4·115 (d) Wrong interpretation of contract ................................. 4·218
(vii) Generally .......................................................... 4·116 (e) Payment obligations and set-off ................................... 4·221
(b) Materials .......................................................................... 4·117 (f) Whether power to suspend ........................................... 4·223
(c) Workmanship ................................................................. 4· 124 (g) Anticipatory breach ....................................................... 4·225
(d) Work to satisfaction of A/E .......................................... 4-126 (h) Effects of rescission ........................................................ 4·227
(3) Obligations as to Progress ........................................................ 4·128 (i) The right to damages ..................................................... 4·228
(4) Obligations as to Cost... ............................................................ 4·130 (j) Quantum meruit: a remedy on rescission .................... 4·230
(5) Notices before Claims ............................................................... 4·132 (k) Recovery of sums paid in quasi-contract ..................... 4·231
Section 2. Obligations of the Owner (2) Release ....................................................................................... 4·232
(1) General Summary of Obligations ............................................ 4·136 (3) Impossibility and Frustration
(a) Administration ............................................................... 4·137 (a) Generally ......................................................................... 4·233
(b) Possession of the site ...................................................... 4· 138 (b) Theory of frustration ..................................................... 4·234
(c} Information and instructions ........................................ 4·139 (c) Leases .............................................................................. 4·238
(2) Payment ...................................................................................... 4·140 (d) Effect of frustration
(3) Giving Possession of the Site ................................................... 4·141 (i) Before the English Act of 1943 ..................... 4·239
(a) Stateofthesite ............................................................... 4·142 (ii) The Frustrated Contracts Act 1943............... 4·241
(b) Extent and time of possession ...................................... 4·144 (e) Incidence of frustration in construction contracts ...... 4·245
(c) Quiet possession ............................................................. 4· 150 (4) Act of God and Force Majeure
(i) Other contractors of the owner ..................... 4· 151 (a) Act of God ..................................................................... 4·265
(ii) Sub-contractor's possession ........................... 4· 157 (b) Force majeure .................................................................. 4·267
(iii) Statutory undertakers ..................................... 4·161 (5) Death or Illness of a Party ........................................................ 4·270
(iv) Strikes and industrial action .......................... 4·164 (6) Illegality ...................................................................................... 4·273
(v) Title and third parties ..................................... 4·166 (7) Limitation of Actions ................................................................ 4·283
(vi) Implied indemnity ........................................... 4· 171 (a) Summary of current legislation in England ................ 4·284
(vii) Other interferences by the owner ................. 4·172 (b) Accrual of cause of action in contract ......................... 4·288
(4) Supplying Instructions as to the Carrying Out of Work (c) Contractual indemnities ................................................ 4·289
(a) Generally ......................................................................... 4·174 (d) Contractor and owner .................................................... 4·291
(b) Original contract work ................................................... 4· 176 (e) Defective work ............................................................... 4·292
(c) Variations ordered by the owner ................................. 4·183 (f) Deliberate concealment ................................................ 4·294
(5) Nomination of Specialist Sub-contractors and Suppliers Section 4. Specific Performance
(a) Original nomination ....................................................... 4· 184 (1) Generally .................................................................................... 4·297
(b) Re-nomination on failure of first sub-contractor ....... 4· 191 (2) Injunctions Having Effect of Compelling Performance ....... 4·305
(6) Appointing an Architect, Engineer or Surveyor (3) Decrees in the Case of Agreements for Building Leases ..... 4·307
(a) Duty to make appointment... ........................................ 4-197
(b) After appointment ......................................................... 4·200 5. ACCEPTANCE AND DEFECTS
(7) Obligation to Permit the Contractor to Carry Out the
Whole of the Work .................................................................... 4·202 Section 1. Acceptance
(8) Duty of Disclosure .................................................................... 4·203 (1) Generally .................................................................................... 5·001
Section 3. Discharge From Further Performance .............................. 4·204 (2) Acceptance not Implied by Occupation ................................. 5·003
(1) Repudiation and Termination for Breach (3) Acceptance, Payment or Judgment no Bar to Claim for
(a) Generally ......................................................................... 4·205 Damages ..................................................................................... 5·007
(b) What breaches are repudiatory? .. (4) Defects where Work is Done to the Approval of the
(i) Fundamental terms ............................ .::: ......... 4·209 Owner ......................................................................................... 5·012
xl TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS xli

(5) Defects where Approval or Certificate of a Third Person ... 5·014 (4) Prevention or Interference by the Owner .............................. 6· 112
(6) Defects which Could have Been Previously Detected ......... 5·020 (5) Conduct Not Amounting to Fraud or Collusion ................... 6· 126
Section 2. Defective Work (6) Summary and Discussion of Preceding Subsections ............. 6· 139
(1) Generally .................................................................................... 5·025 (a) Interest of certifier ......................................................... 6·140
(2) The "Temporary Disconformity" Theory .............................. 5·027 (b) Fraud ................................................................................ 6·141
(3) Express Powers during Construction Period (c) Interference with the certifier ....................................... 6·142
(a) Required powers ............................................................ 5·029 (d) Want of impartiality or indiscreet conduct of the
(b) Current powers in standard forms ............................... 5·033 certifier............................................................................. 6·143
(c) Special anomalies of RIBA/JCT forms ....................... 5·035 (e) Prevention by the owner ............................................... 6·145
(d) No duty of owner or A/E .............................................. 5·038 (f) Refusal of the certifier ................................................... 6· 146
(4) Types of Maintenance and Defects Liability Clauses ........... 5·039 (g) Wrong matters taken into consideration ..................... 6· 149
(5) The Maintenance or Defects Liability Period ....................... 5·045 Section 6. Certificates
(6) Nature of Maintenance or Defects Obligation ...................... 5·050 (1) Generally .................................................................................... 6·152
(7) Damages for Defects ................................................................. 5·059 (2) Form and Sufficiency of Certificate......................................... 6·154
(3) Mistakes in Certificates ............................................................. 6· 167
(4) Correcting a Mistake in a Certificate ...................................... 6·169
6. APPROVAL AND CERTIFICATES (5) Who is to Give the Certificate? ............................................... 6·172
(6) Final Certificates ........................................................................ 6·181
Section 1. Types of Provision (7) Interim Certificates
(1) General Review ......................................................................... 6·001 (a) Generally ......................................................................... 6·186
(2) Narrow Construction of Stipulations ...................................... 6·011 (b) Is interim certificate a condition precedent to
(3) Evidence of Approval... ............................................................ 6·020 payment? ......................................................................... 6·190
(4) Vendor's Approval of Building on Land Sold ....................... 6·021 (c) Is an interim certificate binding on the owner? .......... 6·194
Section 2. Approval by Building Owner (d) The concept of "temporary finality" generally ........... 6·204
(1) Implication of Reasonableness ................................................ 6·022 (e) Extent of valuation in certificate .................................. 6·206
(2) Disapproval Must be Honest.. ................................................. 6·027 (f) Early arbitration ............................................................. 6·209
(3) Approval as to Matters of Taste .............................................. 6·028 (g) Other aspects of interim certificates ............................ 6·214
(4) Binding Effect of Approval ..................................................... 6·029 (8) Final Accounts ........................................................................... 6·215
Section 3. Approval by Third Person Section 7. Effect on Third Persons ...................................................... 6·216
(1) Generally .................................................................................... 6·031 Section 8. Summary of the Law on Conclusiveness of Satisfaction
(2) Whether Certificate, Satisfaction or Approval a Condition or Certificates ....................................................................... 6·218
Precedent to Builder's Right to Sue ........................................ 6·036 Section 9. Status and Duties of Certifier
(3) Whether Employer Bound by Certificate, Satisfaction (1) Generally .................................................................................... 6·220
or Approval... ............................................................................. 6·046 (2) Duty When a Final Certificate has to be Given ..................... 6·225
Section 4. Effect of Arbitration Clause (3) Where the Same Person is Named as both Certifier and
(1) Generally .................................................................................... 6·060 Arbitrator ................................................................................... 6·226
(2) The "Crouch" View .................................................................. 6·063 (4) Duties of Certifier to Building Owner. ................................... 6·228
(3) Distinction between Certifier and Arbitrator ........................ 6·065
(4) Review of Earlier Cases 7. VARIATIONS
(a) Generally ................................................................. ,....... 6·067
(b) Arbitrator not bound by A/E's certificate ................... 6·068 Section 1. What Variations Are
(c) Arbitrator bound by A/E's certificate ......................... 6·078 (1) Generally
(5) Summary of the Law ................................................................. 6·089 (a) Terminology .................................................................... 7·001
Section 5. Recovery Without Certificate (b) Draftsmanship of provisions ......................................... 7·004
(1) Generally .................................................................................... 6·096 (c) Reasons for variation clauses ........................................ 7·005
(2) Disqualification on Ground of Interest ......................,./......... 6·099 (d) General summary ........................................................... 7·006
(3) Disqualification on Ground of Fraud or Collusion ....:':......... 6·106 (e) Defects in modern standard forms ............................... 7·007
xiii TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS xliii
(2) Work Included in the Contract (v) Mistakes of contractor in the bills ................. 8·047
(a) Generally ......................................................................... 7·010 (vi) Approximate bills of quantities ..................... 8·050
(b) Where "as-built" quantities differ from bills .............. 7·015 (c) Fluctuations clauses
(c) Necessary work not mentioned in bills ........................ 7·019 (i) Generally .......................................................... 8·052
(d) Necessary work not mentioned in schedule of rates .. 7·020 (ii) Labour .............................................................. 8·053
(e) Promise to pay when contractor already bound ......... 7.024 (iii) Materials ........................................................... 8·055
(f) Instructions to assist contractors in difficulty.............. 7·025 (iv) Index-based clauses ........................................ 8·057
(g) Temporary works and methods of working ................ 7·037 (d) "Clause 12" or "changed conditions" clauses ............. 8·060
Section 2. V aria tion Claims and Express Provisions (e) "Loss and expense" claims ............................................ 8·069
(1) Generally .................................................................................... 7·041 (f) Bonus and deductions provisions ................................. 8·007
(2) The Power to Order Variations ............................................... 7·043 (3) Retention
(3) Notice of Claims ........................................................................ 7·051 (a) Generally ......................................................................... 8·076
(4) Orders in Writing (b) Express trust provisions
(a) Generally ......................................................................... 7·055 (i) Sub-contracts ................................................... 8·078
(b) What are orders in writing? .......................................... 7·056 (ii) Main contracts ................................................. 8·081
(c) Confirmation or subsequent sanction in writing ........ 7·061 (4) Contra Items .............................................................................. 8·087
( d) Order in writing a condition precedent ....................... 7 ·063 (5) Interest
(e) Order in writing not a condition precedent ................ 7 ·071 (a) Generally ......................................................................... 8·088
(f) Where there is an arbitration clause ............................ 7·075 (b) Statutory powers to order interest
(g) Where a fraud on the contractor .................................. 7·076 (i) Interest on judgments or awards ................... 8·090
(h) Where work is outside the contract or its "scope" ..... 7·079 (ii) Statutory discretionary interest on sums
(i) Waiver ............................................................................. 7·094 claimed ............................................................. 8·091
G) Summary of preceding paragraphs .............................. 7·098 (c) Interest as special damage for non-payment .............. 8·093
(5) Where there is a Certificate ..................................................... 7·099 (d) Interest as damages for other breaches ....................... 8·094
Section 3. Valuation of Variations (e) Express terms for interest ............................................. 8·098
(1) Types of Valuation Clause ....................................................... 7·102 (6) Reasonable Price ....................................................................... 8.101
(2) The "Shopping List" Principle ................................................. 7· 105 (7) Instalments of the Price ............................................................ 8·105
(3) "Preliminaries" Expenditure ................................................... 7·107 Section 2. Damages
(4) Criteria for Valuation ............................................................... 7·111 (1) Generally
(5) Miscellaneous Provisions in Standard Form Valuation (a) Scope of section .............................................................. 8·108
Clauses ........................................................................................ 7·113 (b) General principles in contract and tort ........................ 8· 109
(6) Multiple Interacting Variations ............................................... 7·118 (2) Breach by the Contractor ......................................................... 8·111
Section 4. Appropriation of Payments to Extras ............................... 7·119 (a) Defective or incomplete work ...................................... 8· 119
(i) So-called prima facie rule in tort. .................. 8· 141
8. PRICE AND DAMAGES (ii) Plaintiff's intention to rebuild ........................ 8·142
(iii) Betterment or profit factor ............................ 8· 143
Section 1. Price (iv) Inflation and date of assessment ................... 8·145
(1) Generally .................................................................................... 8·001 (v) Re-building or diminution of value: an
(2) Principal Adjustments of Price intermediate measure .................................. 8· 153A
(a) Measurement contracts generally ................................ 8·005 (vi) Effect of subsequent transfer of property .... 8·154
(b) English bills of quantities contracts (b) Consequential costs of defective work ........................ 8· 156
(i) Evolution of the contracts .............................. 8·016 (i) Third party claims ........................................... 8·157
(ii) Standard Methods of Measurement and (ii) Vacating premises ........................................... 8· 159
the "omitted item" claim ................................ 8·024 (iii) Damages for distress ....................................... 8·160
(iii) Re-measurement at higher prices ................. 8·037 (c) Delay and consequential loss ........................................ 8·162
(iv) Summary of position under English~/ (d) Failure to complete ........................................................ 8·168
standard forms ................................... :............. 8·044 (e) Sub-contracts .................................................................. 8· 169
xliv TABLE OF CONTENTS

(3) Breach by the Owner

(a) Generally ......................................................................... 8·170
(b) Loss of profit
(i) Terminated contracts ..................................... 8· 172 TABLE OF CASES
(ii) Delayed contracts ............................................ 8·176
(iii) Profit and fixed overhead relationship ......... 8·177
(c) Contractor's prime-cost and owner's breaches........... 8·180 (References are to Paragraph numbers with those in bold referring to Illustrations)
(d) Fixed overheads and the Hudson and Eichleay
formulae .......................................................................... 8· 182
(e) Site overheads ................................................................. 8·190 A.B. Marintrans v. Comet Shipping Co. Ltd. [1985] 1 W.L.R. 1270 . . . . . . . . 1·377
A & B Taxis v. Secretary of State for Air (1922) 2 K.B. 328 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·216
(f) Plant ................................................................................. 8·192 A.B.C. v. Waltham Holy Cross U.D.C. See Amalgamated Building Contractors v.
(g) Disturbance and loss of productivity ........................... 8· 196 Waltham Holy Cross U.D.C.
(h) Acceleration claims ........................................................ 8·199 A.B.C. Coupler and Engineering Co., Re. (No. 3) [1970) 1 W L.R. 702; (1970) 114
(i) Global and "total cost" claims ...................................... 8·200 S.J. 242; [1970] 1 AllE.R. 650 . . . . . . . . 16·007
A-Jae Demolition (London) Limited v. Urlin Rent-A-Car Inc. {1990) 74 0.R. 2nd
{j) Use of programmes ..................................................... 8·211B 474,D.C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-041,4·221
(4) Express Terms .................................................;......................... 8·212 AKT Reidar v. Arcos Ltd. (1927) 1 K.B. 352. . . . . . . . . . • • . . . . . 9·005, 10·001, 10·003
(a) "Direct" or "consequential" damage provisions ........ 8·213 A.M.F International v. Magnet Bowling [1968) 1 W.L.R. 1028; (1968) 112 S.J. 522;
[1968) 2All E.R. 789;66 L.G.R. 706 . . . . . . . . . . . 1·009, 1·235, 1·312, 1·329, 1·235,
(b) "No damage" clauses ..................................................... 8·217 1·312, 1·329, 1·332, 1·333, 1·335, l.386, 2·022, 2·197, 4·142,
(5) Double Recovery of Damage .................................................. 8·223 4·266, 5·021, 5·022, 5·024, 5·038, 7·031, 7·037, 8·115,
(6) "Collateral Source" Compensation......................................... 8·225 15-051, 15·053, 15·054
Aberdeen Harbour Board v. Heating Enterprises [1988) 4 Const.
LJ.195. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·327, 15.018, 15·022
Abrams v. Ancllffe [1978) 2 N.Z.LR. 420, N.Z. Sup. a. . . . . . . 1·286, 2.159, 3·001, 4· 130
Index.......................................................................................................... [1] Absalom (F.R.) Ltd. v. Great Western (London) Garden Village Society [1933}
A.C. 592; 102 L.J.K.B. 648; 49 T.L.R. 350 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-072, 6·211, 18· 118
Abu Dhabi Gas Liquefaction Co. v. Eastern Bechtel Corp.; Eastern Bechtel Corp.
v. Ishikawajima Harima Heavy Industries (1982) 126 S.J. 524; [1982) Com,
VOLUME2 LR. 215; [1982) 2 Lloyd's Rep. 425, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·117
Aced v. Hobbs-Sesack 7 Cal. Rep. 391 (1961) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·106
Acme Investments Ltd. v. York Structural Steel Ltd. (1974) 9 N.B.R
699 ....... , ..... , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·248, 4-091, 7·097
(For a more detailed Table of Contents please see Volume 2) Acrecrest v. Hattrell (W.S.) & Partners [1983] Q.B. 260; [1982) 2 W.L.R. 1076;
• (1982) 126 S.J. 729; [1983] 1 AIIE.R.17; (1982) 264 E.G. 245; (1983) 113 New
9. TIME FOR PERFORMANCE L.J. 64; (1983) 22 Build L.R. 88, C.A.; affinnmg [1980JJ.P.L.172; (1979) 252
E.G.1107 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·350, 1·384
10. PENALTIES AND LIQUIDATED DAMAGES Acsim (Southern) v. Danish Contracting and Development Co. 47 BLR 55 and 59,
11. VESTING AND SEIZURE OF MATERIALS AND CA ...... 5.015,5·026,6·006, 6·197, 6·201, 6·202, 6·204, 6·208, 8·087, 8.118, 17·016
PLANT Adam v. Newbigging (1888) 13 App. Cas. 308; 57 LJ.Ch. 1066; 59 L.T. 267; 37 W.R.
12. FORFEITURE AND DETERMINATION 97, H.L.; affirming sub nom. Newbigging v. Adam (1886) 34 Ch.D. 582; 56
LJ.Ch.275;55L.T. 794;35W.R.597;3T.L.R. 259, C.A.....• , .... 1·150, 1·163
13. SUB-CONTRACTS Adamsv. Great North of Scotland Railway [1891) A.C.31;26Sc.L.R. 765; 16Ct. of
14. ASSIGNMENT Sess. Cas. (4th ser.) 84 . , , .... , . . . . . . . . . . . , .... , • . . . . . . . . . . 18·129
15. INSURANCE AND INDEMNITIES Adcock's Trustees v. Bridge Rural District Council (1911) 75
J.P. 241. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-084, 4·118, S,018, 6·063, 6-070, 6.093, 8·116
16. BANKRUPTCY AND LIQUIDATION Addie v. Henderson (1879) 7 Ct. of Sess. Cas. {4th ser.) R. 79 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·103
17. BONDS AND GUARANTEES . Adelaide (The aty of) v. Jennings Industries (1985) 57 A.L.R., 455 High Court of
18. ARBITRATION Australia. , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . , ..... 13·013, 13·069, 13,084
Adenberg v. Canning (1992) 62 Build. L.R 47 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 ·378
Administrator, Natal v. Magill Grant and Nell, 1967 (1) SA 660, S.A. . . . . . . . . . . 8·079,
13· 126, 14·045, 16·054
Aesco Steel Inc, v. Jones Construction Company (1985) 621 F. Supp. 1576
(1985) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13·112
Aetha Insurance Company v. Hellmuth, 392 F.(2d) 4n {1968), 8th Circuit . . . . 1 ·305
Aetna Surety Co. v. Bedford-Stuyvesant Restoration Corporation 455 N.Y. Sup.
p. 265 (1982), App. Div, NY 14·062

xiv
 First Edition (1891) By Alfred Hudson
Second Edition (1895) By Alfred Hudson TABLE OF CONTENTS
Third Edition (1906) By Alfred Hudson
Fourth Edition (1914) By Alfred Hudson
Fifth Edition (1926) By Alfred Hudson K.C. VOLUMEl
Sixth Edition (1933).By Lawrence Mead
Seventh Edition (1946) By Lawrence Mead
Eighth Edition (1959) By E.J. Rimmer Q.C., and (Fora more detailed Table of Contents please see Volume 1)
I.N. Duncan Wallace
Ninth Edition (1965) By I.N. Duncan Wallace
Tenth Edition (1970) By I.N. Duncan Wallace 1. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF LAW
2. ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS
Published in 1994 by 3. TENDERS AND ESTIMATES
Sweet & Maxwell Limited, of
4. PERFORMANCE
100 A venue Road, 5. ACCEPTANCE AND DEFECTS
Swiss Cottage, London NW3 3PF 6. APPROVAL AND CERTIFICATES
http://www.smlawpub.co.uk
7. VARIATIONS
Phototypeset by 8. PRICE AND DAMAGES
MFK Typesetting Ltd., Hitchin, Herts.

Printed in Great Britain by

The Bath Press, Bath VOLUME2
Reprinted 1997 Contents Page
Table of Cases .............................................................................................. xv
A cata.Iogue record for this book is available from the British Library Table of Statutes.................................................................................... lxxxvii
Table of Statutory Instruments· ................................................................ xciii
ISBN O421 33260 3 Rules of the Supreme Court ...................................................................... xcv
Table of References to RIBA Contract Form Conditions ................... xcvii
All rights reserved. Table of References to ICE Contract Form Conditions ............................ ci
No part of this publication may be
reproduced or transmitted, in any form
ur by means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, Para.
recording or otherwise, or stored in any retrieval
system of any nature, without the written permission 9. TIME FOR PERFORMANCE
of the copyright holder and the publisher, application
for which shall be made to the publisher.
(1) Generally .................................................................................... 9·001
No natural forests were destroyed to make this product. (2) Where Time Specified for Completion ................................... 9·006
Farmed timber was used and replanted. (3) Where Specified Time Inapplicable ........................................ 9·007
(4) Whether Time of the Essence .................................................. 9·013
(5) Notice Rendering Time of the Essence .................................. 9·022
(6) Reasonable Time ....................................................................... 9·024
©
(7) Due Diligence and Expedition Terms .................................... 9·032
Text: I.N. Duncan Wallace
(8) Programmes Supplied by Contractor...................................... 9·040
1995
(9) Nature of Required Completion ............................................. 9·043

v
 vi TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS vii
10. PENALTIES AND LIQUIDATED DAMAGES
12. FORFEITURE AND DETERMINATION
Section 1. Construction and Effect of Clauses Section 1. The General Nature of the Power to Forfeit or
(1) Generally .................................................................................. 10-001 Determine
(2) Distinction between Penalties and Liquidated Damages ... 10·006 (1) The Owner's Right to Possession .......................................... 12·001
(3) Clauses Operating as Limitations on Damages ................... 10·022 (2) Determination of the Contract .............................................. 12·002
Section 2. Release of Liquidated Damages (a) Common law determination ....................................... 12·003
(1) Release by Prevention ............................................................ 10·024 (b) Contractual detennination .......................................... 12·004
(2) Prevention by Late Variations ............................................... 10·043 (3) Contractual Determination Not Exclusive .......................... 12·006
(3) Effect of Forfeiture ................................................................. 10·047 (4) Events on which the Express Power Usually Conditioned
(4) Effect of Payment without Deduction .................................. 10·054 (a) Owners' determinations .............................................. 12·011
(5) Partial Re·entry or Occupation ............................................. 10·057 (b) Owners' "convenience" clauses .................................. 12·014
Section 3. Extension of Time (c) Contractors' determinations ....................................... 12·018
(1) Drafting of Extension of Time Clauses ................................ 10·063 (5) Relief Against Forfeiture ....................................................... 12·021
(2) Whether Decision of NE Binding ........................................ 10·069 (6) Good Faith, Ex Aequo et Bono or other Limitations ......... 12·028
(3) Effect of Unqualified Certificate ........................................... 10·071 (7) Necessity for Unequivocal Act .............................................. 12·031
(4) Contents of Certificate ............................................................ 10·075 (8) Contractual Notice Requirements
(5) Time for Exercise .................................................................... 10·078 (a) Generally ....................................................................... 12·033
(6) Effect on Damages Claimed by Contractor ······················t·· 10·091 (b) Contents ofnotice ........................................................ 12·034
(7) Phased Completion .............................................................. 10·091A (c) Time requirements ofnotices ..................................... 12·038
Section 4. Summary of Preceding Contracts .................................... 10·092 (d) Formalities of notice .................................................... 12·042
Section 5. Policy of Liquidated Damages and Extension of (9) Who is to Ascertain Events? .................................................. 12·045
Time Clauses ...................................................................... 10.096 (10) Interpretation of Clauses ........................................................ 12·046
(11) Effect of Waiver and Estoppel .............................................. 12·050
(12) Set-off and Contractors' Detenninations for
Non-payment ........................................................................... 12·055
11. VESTING AND SEIZURE OF MATERIALS AND Section 2. Effect of Exercising a Forfeiture Clause
PLANT (1) Generally .................................................................................. 12·059
(2) The Rights Conferred ............................................................. 12·062
Section 1. Ownership in the Absence of Express Provision (a) To seize materials ......................................................... 12·063
(1) Generally .................................................................................. 11·00! (b) To seize money in hand ............................................... 12·064
(2) Materials, Goods and Fittings ................................................ 11·003 (c) To complete the works ................................................ 12·065
(3) Contractor's or Construction Plant ....................................... 11·015 (d) Agreement void or voidable on re-entry................... 12·066
Section 2. Express Provisions (3) What Sums are Included in Forfeiture ................................. 12·067
(1) Generally .................................................................................. 11·019 (4) Position of Owner Completing after Determination .......... 12·071
(2) Effect of Provisions for Payment. .......................................... 11 ·044 Section 3. Wrongful Forfeiture
(3) Whether Vesting or Seizure Clauses are Bills of (1) When Forfeiture is Wrongful... .............................................. 12·076
Sale ............................................................................................ 11·046 (2) Remedies for Wrongful Forfeiture
(4) Validity of Seizure or Forfeiture ........................................... 11.048 (a) Damages ........................................................................ 12·082
(5) Time of Vesting or Seizure ..................................................... 11·049 (b) Quantum meruit alternative ........................................ 12·083
(6) Reputed Ownership ................................................................ 11.050 (c) Right to Possession of Owner ..................................... 12·084
(7) Third Party Rights and Retention of Title ........................... 11 ·051
Section 3. Lien 13. SUB-CONTRACTS
(1) Common Law and Equitable Liens ...................................... 11.059
Section 1. Generally
(2) Contractual Liens .................................................................... 11·060
(3) Mechanics' Liens ..................................................................... 11.063 (1) Ordinary or "Domestic" Sub-contracts ................................ 13·001
Section 4. Old Materials ..................................................................... 11 ·064 (2) Nominated Sub-contracts ....................................................... 13·003
(3) Express Prohibitions on Sub-contracting ............................. 13·014
viii TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ix
Section 2. Building Owner and Sub-contractor Section 2. .Assignment of Contractual Rights
(1) Generally .................................................................................. 13·015 (1) Generally .................................................................................. 14·012
(2) No Privily of Contract ............................................................ 13-016 (2) Statutory Assignments ............................................................ 14·016
(3) Liability in Tort (3) Equitable Assignments ........................................................... 14·017
(a) Generally ....................................................................... 13-042 (4) Assignment of Personal Contracts ........................................ 14·019
(b) Donoghue v. Stevenson physical damage .................. 13·043 (5) Notice ........................................................................................ 14·021
(c) Economic loss undet the Anns principle ................... 13·044 (6) Assignee Takes Subject to Equities ...................................... 14·022
(d) Economic loss under the Hedley Byrne doctrine ..... 13·045 Section 3. New Contract with Third Person ..................................... 14·023
(4) Name-borrowing Provisions .................................................. 13·046 Section 4. Unassignable Rights .......................................................... 14·024
(5) Direct or Collateral Warranties (1) Bare Right of Litigation ......................................................... 14·025
(a) Collateral warranties .................................................... 13·053 (a) As a compromise of litigation ..................................... 14·026
(b) Direct sub-contractor warranties ............................... 13·055 (b) On transfer of property ............................................... 14·027
(6) Express Trust and Pay Direct Provisions ............................. 13·060 (c) Damages recoverable on assignment ......................... 14·032
Section 3. Building Owner and Contractor (2) Rights of Seizure and Forfeiture ........................................... 14·037
(1) Main Contractor Responsibility for Nominated (3) Arbitration Clauses ................................................................. 14·038
Sub-contractor ......................................................................... 13·061 Section 5. Assignment of Moneys Due
(2) Bickerton and the Duty to Nominate .................................... 13·066 (1) Generally .................................................................................. 14·040
(3) Provisional and P-C Sum Items ............................................. 13-089 (2) MoneysnotyetDue ................................................................ 14·041
(4) Cash discount ........................................................................... 13·094 (3) Notice to Building Owner ...................................................... 14·046
Section 4. Main Contractor and Sub-contractor (4) Form of Assigmnent ............................................................... 14·047
(1) Generally .................................................................................. 13·096 (5) Equities ..................................................................................... 14·049
(2) Documentation ........................................................................ 13·097 Section 6. Provisions Against Assignment
(3) Incorporation of Terms .......................................................... 13·099 (1) Interpretation of Provisions ................................................... 14·055
(a) Incorporation of main contract terms ........................ 13· 100 (2) Whether Prohibitions of Assignment Valid ......................... 14·058
(b) Incorporation of sub-contract conditions .................. 13·105 Section 7. Attachment of Moneys Due ............................................. 14·063
(4) Quotations to Tendering Main Contractors ........................ 13·107 Section" 8. Assignment by Operation of Law
(5) "Pay wheil Paid" Provisions (1) Generally .................................................................................. 14·070
(a) Generally ....................................................................... 13·108 (2) Death ........................................................................................ 14·07!
(b) Whether a condition of liability.................................. 13·110
(c) Owner cross-claim or set-off ....................................... 13·115
(6) Payment and Set-off................................................................ 13-117
(7) Cash Discount.. ........................................................................ 13·118
Section 5. Payment Direct and Express Trust Provisions 15. INSURANCE AND INDEMNITIES
(1) Generally .................................................................................. 13-120
(2) Payment of Sub-contractor Direct ........................................ 13· 121
(3) Express Trust Provisions ........................................................ 13· 130 Section 1. Insurance
Section 6. Sub-contractor's Lien and Property ................................ 13· 132 (1) Generally
Section 7. Performance of Sub-contracts .......................................... 13·133 ( a) Purpose of contractually required insurance ............ 15·001
(b) Two main types of contractor insurance ................... 15·002
(c) Distinction between insurance and bonds ................. 15·003
(d) Over-insurance common in U.K. standard forms .... 15·005
14. ASSIGNMENT (e) Ingenuities ofwording ................................................. 15·006
(f) Subrogation and assignment ....................................... 15·007
(g) Comprehensive project cover ..................................... 15·008
Section 1. Assignment of Contractual Liability (h) "Accident" wording ..................................................... 15·0!0
(1) Generally .................................................................................. 14·001 (i) Sub-contractor insurance ............................................ 15·011
(2) Vicarious Performance of Contractual Liabilities ............... 14·003 G) Summary of insurance discussed in this Chapter ..... 15·012

, -------
x TABLE OF CON'IENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS xi

(2) Insurance of Works Section 8. B~qkruptcy of Architect or Engineer ............................. 16-059

(a) Joint insurance .............................................................. 15·013 Section 9. Priority of Earlier Assignees of Moneys Due ................ 16·061
(b} Owner insurance .......................................................... 15·015
(3) Adjoining Property Insurance ............................................... 15·023
(4) Third Party Liability Insurance ............................................. 15·026 17. BONDS AND GUARANTEES
(5) Professional Insurance ............................................................ 15·031
Section 2. Indemnities Section 1. Generally ............................................................................ 17·001
(1) Generally .................................................................................. 15·038 (1) Terminology ............................................................................. 17·004
(2) Interpretation of Clauses ........................................................ 15·040 (2) Types of Obligation Guaranteed ........................................... 17·005
(3) "Secondary" Indemnitee Negligence .................................... 15·047 (3) Form of Traditional Bond
(4) Unsuccessful Third Party Claims .......................................... 15·055 (a) Bond effectively a guarantee ...................................... 17·007
(5) Indemnitor's Sub.contractors ................................................ 15·058 (b) The Trafalgar House case ........................................ 17-0llA
(6) Implied Indemnity ................................................................... 15·061 (4) EnforcementofBonds ............................................................ 17·012
(a) Breach by creditor. ....................................................... 17·013
(b) Rescission by creditor .................................................. 17·014
(c) Set-off by surety ........................................................... 17·016
(5) Writing and Consideration ..................................................... 17·017
16. BANKRUPTCY AND LIQUIDATION (6) Interpretation........................................................................... 17-019
(7) Notice Unnecessary: Limitations and Duration .................. l 7·021
Section 2. Discharge of Surety
Section 1. Insolvency Generally
(1) Generally .................................................................................. 17·023
(1) Scope of Present Chapter ....................................................... 16·001 (2) Discharge by Full Performance ............................................. 17·024
(2) Insolvency and its Effect··········································-············ 16·004 (3) Non·disclosure ......................................................................... 17·025
Section 2. Disclaimer and Adoption ................................................. 16·011 (4) Laches ....................................................................................... 17·028
Section 3. Right of Set·off under Mutual Credit and Dealing (5) Express Notice Requirements ............................................... 17·029
Clause .................................................................................. 16·014 (6) Acts to the Prejudice of the Surety
Section 4. Administrative Receivers ................................................. 16-020 (a) Generally ....................................................................... 17-034
Section 5. Administration and Administrators ................................ 16·024 (b) Payment guarantees ..................................................... 17·041
Section 6. Insolvency of Construction Owner (c) Performance guarantees
(1) Continuation of Contract ....................................................... 16·027 (i) Increased or advanced payments ................ 17·043
(2) Contractor's Possible Right to Security ................................ 16·028 (ii) Alterations of the work ................................ 17·049
(3) Express Termination Powers ................................................. 16·029 (iii) Extensions of time ......................................... 17·052
(4) Statutory Right of Rescission ................................................ 16·030 (iv) Other alterations to the contract ................. 17·053
(5) Express Trust Provisions in Main Contracts ........................ 16·031 Section 3. Unconditional or "On Demand~' Bonds
Section 7. Insolvency of Contractor (1) Generally
(1) Continuation of the Contract ................................................. 16·032 (a) Recent emergence ........................................................ 17·054
(2) Provisions Affected by Contractor's Insolvency ................. 16·034 (b) Nature of unconditional or "on demand"
(3) Termination and Seizure Provisions ..................................... 16·035 undertakings ................................................................. 17 ·056
(4) Vesting of Materials or Plant in Owner (c) Counter-indemnities and the "indemnity string" ..... 17·059
(a) General insolvency principle ...................................... 16·048 (2) Interpretation........................................................................... l 7·060
(b) Retention of title .......................................................... 16·049 (3) Call must Conform to Bond Requirt'.:ments ......................... 17·064
(c) Bills of sale, registrable charges and Sale of (4) Fraud as a Ground of Avoidance .......................................... 17·067
Goods Act, s.25 ............................................................. 16·050 (5) Contractual Restrictions on Call ........................................... 17·072
(d) Reputed ownership ...................................................... 16·052 (6) Abuse of On Demand Bonds ................................................ 17·076
(5) Power to Pay Sub·contractors Direct ................................... 16·054 (7) ICC Counter·guarantee Scheme ........................................... 17·077
(6) Express Trust Provisions in Sub·contracts ........................... 16·055 (8) Debtor's Rights when Bond is Paid ...................................... 17·078
(7) Suggested Principles of Invalidation ..................................... 16·056 Section 4. Co·sureties .......................................................................... 17·079
xii TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS xiii

18. ARBITRATION (g), ·General discretion to grant or refuse stay

(i) Generally ........................................................ 18·105
Section 1. General Principles (ii) Some issues only within clause .................... 18·108
(1) Submissions and Agreements to Refer ................................ 18-001 (iii) "Scott v. Avery" clauses ................................ 18· 109
(2) Principal Characteristics of English Arbitration (iv) Multiplicity of proceedings .......................... 18· 111
( a) Control by the courts ................................................... 18·002 (v) Where questions of law are involved .......... 18·118
(b) Appeal to the courts on point of law ......................... 18·004 (h) Step in the action .......................................................... 18·121
(c) Arbitrator may not decide his own jurisdiction ........ 18·006 (3) Succession and Assignment
(d) Arbitrator must apply the law .................................... 18·010 (a) Succession ..................................................................... 18· 124
(3) · The English Legislation (b) Assigmnent ................................................................... 18·125
(a) The current arbitration acts ........................................ 18·013 Section 4. Disqualification and Misconduct of Arbitrators
(b) Historical background ................................................. 18·014 (1) Generally .................................................................................. 18· 126
(c) Deficiencies in the present law ................................... 18·016 (2) Interest and Bias ...................................................................... 18·127
(4) Comparative Law of Arbitration .......................................... 18·019 (3) Misconduct ............................................................................... 18·!32
Section 2. The Arbitration Agreement Section 5. Procedure in Arbitrations
(1) Formal Requirements ............................................................. 18·025 (1) Generally .................................................................................. 18·150
(2) Terms of the Agreement ........................................................ 18·028 (2) Nature of Construction Disputes .......................................... 18·153
(3) Incorporation of Arbitration Clauses ................................... 18·031 (3) Conduct of the Arbitration
(4) Special Provisions in Construction Contracts (a) Prior to acceptance of appointment
(a) "Scottv.Avery" clauses ............................................... 18·036 (i) Jurisdiction ..................................................... 18·155
(b) "Early arbitration" provisions .................................... 18·042 (ii) Remuneration ................................................ 18·156
(c) "Prior reference" provisions ....................................... 18·045 (iii) Availability of arbitrator .............................. 18· 157
(d) Time-bar provisions (b) Interlocutory matters after appointment
(i) Generally ........................................................ 18·048 (i) Generally ........................................................ 18·158
(ii) Time-bars in construction contracts............ 18·049 (ii) Pleadings ........................................................ 18· 159
(iii) "Undue hardships" under section 27 of (c) The hearing ................................................................... 18·161
the Arbitration Act 1950 .............................. 18·056 (4) Interim Awards ........................................................................ 18·167
(iv) The FIDIC time-bar ..................................... 18·058 (5) Final Awards
(e) Arbitration agreements distinguished from (a) Costs ............................................................................... 18·169
agreements for valuation or certification .................. 18·061 (b) Reasoned awards .......................................................... 18·170
( f) Two or three arbitrator provisions ............................. 18·072 (c) Where the award is made ............................................ 18· 171
(g) Court's powers of appointment of arbitrators .......... 18·075 (6) Appeals From Arbitrators ..................................................... 18· 172
(h) Named arbitrators and appointing bodies ................ 18·076 (a) Appeals on a point of law
(5) International Arbitration ....................................................... 18·078 (i) The requirement of leave and the Nema
(a) Jurisdiction of the English courts ............................... 18·079 guidelines ....................................................... 18·173
(b) Choice of law ................................................................ 18·083 (ii) No evidence as a point of law ...................... 18·175
Section 3. Effect of the Arbitration Agreement (b) Detennination of preliminary points of law ............. 18· 177
(1) Enforceability Generally ........................................................ 18·088 (c) Appeals from awards of costs ..................................... 18·178
(2) Grant and Refusal of Stay ...................................................... 18·089 (7) Sealed Offers ............................................................................ 18·182
(a) "No dispute" cases ....................................................... 18·090 Section 6. Current' Outlook for English Arbitration Law .............. 18· 192
(b) "No dispute" as to part... ............................................. 18·091
( c) Defendant not ready and willing to arbitrate ........... 18·093
(ct) Dispute not within the clause ..................................... 18·095 Index.......................................................................................................... [1]
(e) Arbitrator without power to decide dispute ............. 18·097
(i) Contract void ab initio .................................. 18-098
(ii) Rectification ................................................... 18·099
(f) Fraud or serious personal charges .............................. 18·102

------
'

-
 ,,..-._

xliv TABLE OF CONTENTS

(3) Breach by the Owner

(a) Generally ......................................................................... 8·170
(b) Loss of profit
(i) Terminated contracts ..................................... 8·172 TABLE OF CASES
(ii) Delayed contracts ............................................ 8·176
(iii) Profit and fixed overhead relationship ......... 8·177
(c) Contractor's prime-cost and owner's breaches ........... 8·180 (References are to Paragraph numbers with those in bold referring to Illustrations)
(d) Fixed overheads and the Hudson and Eichleay
formulae .......................................................................... 8· 182
(e) Site overheads ................................................................. 8· 190 A.B. Marintrans v. Comet Shipping Co. Ltd. {1985] 1 W.L.R. 1270 . . . . . . . . . . 1-377
(f) Plant ................................................................................. 8·192 A & B Taxis v. Secretary of State for Air (1922) 2 K.B. 328 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·216
A.B.C. v. Waltham Holy Cross U.D.C. See Amalgamated Building Contractors v.
(g) Disturbance and loss of productivity ........................... 8· 196 Waltham Holy Cross U.D.C.
(h) Acceleration claims ........................................................ 8·199 A.B.C. Coupler and Engineering Co., Re. (No. 3) {1970] 1 W.L.R. 702; (1970) 114
(i) Global and "total cost" claims ...................................... 8·200 S.J. 242; {1970] 1 All E.R. 650 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16·007
G) Use of programmes ..................................................... 8·211B A-JacDemolition (London) Limited v. Urlin Rent-A-Car Inc. (1990) 74 0.R. 2nd
474, D.C.. . . . . ................................. 4-041, 4·221
(4) Express Terms ........................................................................... 8·212 AKT Reidar v. Arcos Ltd. [1927] 1 K.B. 352 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9·005, 10·001, 10·003
(a) "Direct" or "consequential" damage provisions ........ 8·213 A.M.F International v. Magnet Bowling [1968] 1 W.L.R. 1028; (1968) 112 S.J. 522;
(b) "No damage" clauses ..................................................... 8·217 {1968] 2 All E.R. 789; 66 L.G.R. 706 ........... 1·009, 1·235, 1·312, 1·329, 1·235,
1·312, 1·329, 1·332, 1·333, 1·335, 1.386, 2·022, 2·197, 4·142,
(5) Double Recovery of Damage .................................................. 8·223 4·266, 5·021, 5·022, 5·024, 5·038, 7·031, 7·037, 8-115,
(6) "Collateral Source" Compensation ......................................... 8·225 15·051. 15·053, 15·054
Aberdeen Harbour Board v. Heating Enterprises [1988] 4 Const.
L.J.195 ..................................... 1·327, 15.018, 15-022
Abrams v. Ancliffe [1978] 2 N.Z.L.R. 420, N.Z. Sup. Ct....... 1·286, 2.159, 3·001, 4·130
Index.......................................................................................................... [1] Absalom (F.R.) Ltd. v. Great Western (London) Garden Village Society {1933)
A.C. 592; 102 L.J.K.B. 648; 49 T.L.R. 350 ............... 6,072, 6·211, 18·118
Abu Dhabi Gas Liquefaction Co. v. Eastern Bechtel Corp.; Eastern Bechtel Corp.
VOLUME2 v. lshik.awajima Harima Heavy Industries (1982) 126 S.J. 524; {1982] Com.
L.R. 215; [1982] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 425, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·117
Aced v. Hobbs-Sesack 7 Cal. Rep. 391 (1961) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·106
Acme Investments Ltd. v. York Structural Steel Ltd. (1974) 9 N.B.R.
(For a more detailed Table of Contents please see Volume 2) 699 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·248, 4-091, 7-097
Acrecrest v. Hattrell (W.S.) & Partners [1983] Q.B. 260; {1982) 2 W.L.R. 1076;
(1982) 126 S.J. 729; [1983] 1 All E.R.17; (1982) 264 E.G. 245; (1983) 113 New
9. TIME FOR PERFORMANCE L.J. 64; (1983) 22 Build L.R. 88, C.A.; affirming {1980) J.P.L. 172; (1979) 252
10. PENALTIES AND LIQUIDATED DAMAGES E.G.1107 .......................................... 1·350, 1·384
Acsim (Southern) v. Danish Contracting and Development Co. 47 BLR 55 and 59,
11. VESTING AND SEIZURE OF MATERIALS AND C.A...... 5·015, 5·026, 6·006, 6·197, 6·201, 6·202, 6·204, 6-208, 8·087, 8.118, 17·016
PLANT Adam v. Newbigging (1888) 13App. Cas. 308;57L.J.Ch.1066;59L.T.267;37W.R.
12. FORFEITURE AND DETERMINATION 97, H.L.; affirming sub nom. Newbigging v. Adam (1886) 34 Ch.D. 582; 56
13. SUB-CONTRACTS LJ.Ch. 275; 55 L.T. 794; 35 W.R. 597; 3 T.L.R. 259, C.A ........... 1·150, 1·163
Adams v. Great North of Scotland Railway [1891] A.C. 31; 26 Sc. LR. 765; 16 Ct. of
14. ASSIGNMENT Sess. Cas. (4th ser.) 84 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·129
15. INSURANCE AND INDEMNITIES Adcock's Trustees v. Bridge Rural District Council (1911) 75
16. BANKRUPTCY AND LIQUIDATION J.P. 241. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.o84, 4·118, 5·018, 6·063, 6-070, 6.093, 8·116
Addie v. Henderson (1879) 7 Ct. of Sess. Cas. (4th ser.) R. 79 6·103
17. BONDS AND GUARANTEES . Adelaide (The City of) v. Jennings Industries (1985) 57 A.L.R., 455 High Court of
18. ARBITRATION Australia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13·013, 13·069, 13.084
Adenberg v. Canning (1992) 62 Build. L.R. 47 1·378
Administrator, Natal v. Magill Grant and Nell, 1967 (1) SA 660, S.A........... 8·079,
13·126, 14·045, 16·054
Aesco Steel Inc. v. Jones Construction Company (1985) 621 F. Supp. 1576
(1985) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-112
Aetha Insurance Company v. Helhnuth, 392 F.(2d) 472 (1968), 8th Circuit . . . 1·305
Aetna Surety Co. v. Bedford-Stuyvesant Restoration Corporation 455 N.Y. Sup.
p. 265 (1982), App. Div, NY 14·062

xiv
xlvi TABLE OF CASES TABLE OF CASES xivii

Agip Sp Av. Navigazione Alta Italia Sp A; Nai Genova and Nai Superba, The [1984] Andreae v. Selfridge & Co. Ltd. [1938] Ch. I; [1937] 3 AUE.R. 255; 107 L.J.Ch.126;
1 Lloyd's Rep. 353, C.A.; affirming [1983] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 333; (1983) 133 157 L.T. 317; 81 S.J. 525, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·339
New L.J. 621; [1983] Can. L.R.170.... . ........ 1·114, 1·115, 1·124 Andrews v. Belfield (1857) 2 C.B.(N.s.) 779; 29 L.T.(o.s.) 81, 212; 109 R.R
Air-a-Plane Corporation v. U.S. 408 F.(2d) 1030 (1969). . 7·080, 7·088 885 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·027, 6°028
Airport Commission v. U.S. Fidelity & Guarantee Co. 86 S.C. 2nd 249, 252 - - v. Lawrence (1865) 19 C.B.(N.s.) 768; 147 R.R. 760 .............. · . . 17-053
(1955) . . 17-020 - v . Schooling [1991) 1 W.L.R. 783; [1991] 3 All E.R. 723; (1991) 135 S.J. 446;
Aitken v. Bachelor (1893) 62 L.J.Q.B. 193; 68 L.T. 530; 5 R. 218; 9 T.L.R. 21 18·025 (1991) 23 H.L.R. 316; 53 BLR 68; 26 Con. L.R. 33; The Times, March 21,
Ajayi v. Briscoe (R.T.) (Nigeria) [1964] 1 W.L.R. 1326; 108 S.J. 857; [1964] 3 All 1991, C.A. . . . . . . . . . ......................... 1·363
E ..R. 556, P.C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·256 - - v. Smith (1835) 2 Cr. M. & R. 627; 1 Gale 335; Tyr & Gr. 173; 5 LJ.
Al Kandari v. Brown (J.R.) & Co. [1988] Q.B. 665; [1988] 2 W.L.R. 671; (1988) 132 Ex. 80 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17·017
S.J. 462; [1988] 1 AllE.R. 833; (1988) 138 New L.J. 62; (1988) Fam.Law 382; Angel v. Jay [1911] 1 K.B. 666; 80 L.J.K.B. 458; 103 L.T. 809; 55 S.J. 140. . . . 1·148, 3·077
[1988] L.S.Gaz. April 13, 1988, C.A.; reversing [1987] Q.B. 514; [1987] 2 Anglian Water Authority v. RDL Contracting 43 BLR 98 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·168
W .L.R.449; (1987) 131 S.J. 225; [1987] 2 AIIE.R. 302; (1987) 84 L.S.Gaz. 825; Anglo-Egyptian Navigation Co. v. Rennie (1875) L.R. 10 C.P. 271; 44 L.J.C.P. 130;
(1987) 137 New L.J. 36 . . . . . . 1·289 32 L.T. 467; 23 W.R. 626; on appeal, L.R. 10; C.P. 571 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·251
Alampi v. Swartz (1964) 43 D.L.R. (2d) 11 . . . 1-104 Annamunthodo v. Oilfield Workers' Trade Union [1961] A.C. 945; [1961] 3 W.L.R.
Alberta Building Co. v. City of Calgary (1911) 16 W.L.R. 443, Canada ..... 6·107, 6-119 650; 105 S.J. 706; [1961] 3 All E.R. 621; [25 M.L.R. 86], P.C. . . . . . . . · . . 1·126
Alberta Carriers v. V ollan R. (Alta) (1977) lOA.R. 501; (1977) 81 D.L.R. 672, Alta. Annefield, The (1971] P. 168; [1971] 2 W.L.R. 320; [1971J 1 Lloyd's Rep. 1,
Sup. Ct. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... .. 1-379 C.A.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·027, 18·032
Alcock v. Wraith (1991) 59 Build. L.R. 16, [1991] E.G.C.S. 137; [1991] N.P.C. 135; Anos v. Merton London Borough Council [(1987) 137 New L.J. 794]; [1978] A.C.
The Times, December 23, 1991, C.A.................. . .. 1·388, 1·389 728; [1977] 2 W.L.R. 1024; (1977) 121 S.J. 377; (1977) 75 L.G.R. 555; [1977]
Alderslai:le v. Hendon Laundry [1945] K.B. 189; 1 All E.R. 244; 114 L.J.K.B. 196; J.P.L. 514; (1977) 243 E.G. 523, 591; [1977 L.G.C. 498; (1987) L.S. 319];
172 L.T. 153; 61 T.L.R. 216; 89 S.J. 164. . 1·235, 5-042, 15·015, 15·016, sub norn. Anos v. London Borough of Merton [1977] 2 All E.R. 492, H.L.;
15·020, 15.040, 15-041, 15-042, 15·043, 15·046, 15·047, 15·048, 15-051, affinning sub nom. Anos v. Walcroft Property Co. (1976) 241 E.G.
15·053, 15.054, 15.057 311, C.A.. . . . . ... 1·276, 1·277, 1·279, 1·292, 1-301, 1·307, 1·314, 1·326, 1·327,
Alexander v. Mercouris [1979] 1 W .L.R. 1270, (1979) 123 S.J. 604; [1979] 3 All E.R. 1·345, 1-346, 1·347, 1·348, 1·349, 1·350, 1·351, 1·352, 1·353,
305; (1979) 252 E.G. 911, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . 1·362 1·354, 1·355, 1·356, 1·357, 1·359, 1·360, 1·361, 1·364, 1-367,
~ v. Webber [1922] 1 K.B. 642; 91 L.J.K.B. 320; 126 L.T. 512; 38 T.L.R. 42 3·079 1·369, 1·372, 1·374, 1·375, 1·379, 1·384, 1·385, 1·388, 1-389,
Alghussein Establishment v. Eton College [1988] 1 W.L.J;l. 587; [1991] 1 All E.R. 2·083, 2·110, 2·129, 2-148, 2·152, 2-222, 4·107, 4·284, 4·285,
267; (1988) 132 SJ. 750, H.L.; a/finning The Times, February 16, 1987, 4·287, 4·288, 8-223, 13·042, 13·044, 14·002A
C.A. . . . . . . . . 1·188 Anstruther-Gough-Calthorpe v. McOscar [1924] 1 K.B. 716; 130 L.T. 691; sub nom.
Alkok v. Grymek (1968) 67 D.LR. (2d.) 718, Supreme Ct.; affirming in part (1966) Calthorpe v. McOscar, 93 L.J.K.B. 273; 40 T.L.R. 223; 68 ~.J. 367 . . . . . . 5·041
56 D.L.R. (2d) 393; [1966] C.L.Y. 1067 4·210 Antaios, The. See Antaios Compania Naviera SA v. Salen Redenerna AB.
Allen v. Pierce (1895) 3 Terr. L.R. 319. . . . . . .. . ... 8·125, 8·137 Antaios Compania Naviera SA v. Salen Rederierna AB [1985] A.C. 191; [1984] 3
- - v. Robles. Compagnie Parisienne de Garantie, Third Party [1969] 1 W.L.R. W.L.R. 592; (1984) 128S.J. 564; [1984] 3 AllE.R. 229; [1984] 2Lloyd's Rep.
1193; [1969] 3 All E.R. 154; [1969J 2 Lloyd's Rep. 61; sub nom. Allen v. 235; [1984] L.M.C.L.Q. 547; (1984) 81 L.S.Gaz. 2776; [1985] J.B.L. 200, H.L.;
Robles (1969) 113 S.J. 484, C.A. . . 4·227 affirming [1983] 1 W.L.R. 1362; (1983) 127 S.J. 730; [1983] 3 All E.R. 777;
Alliance Bank Ltd. v. Broome (1864) 2 Dr. & Sm. 289;5 New Rep. 69; 34 L.J.Ch. {1983] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 473; [1983] Com. L.R. 262, C.A.. . . . . . . 1·185, 1·217, 1-220,
256; 11 L.T. 322; 10 Jur.(N.s.) 1121; 13 W.R.127; 62 E.R. 631 1·079 18-004, 18·173, 18·174
Allied Finance & Investments Ltd. v. Haddow & Co. [19831 N.Z.L.R. 22 . . . . . . 1·289 Antino v. EppingForestDistrictCouncil53BLR56; (1991) 1551.P. 663; (1991) 155
Alpenstow v. Regalian Properties [1985] 1 W.L.R. 721; (1985) 129 S.J. 400; [1985] 2 J.P.N. 426; The Times, March 11, 1991 D.C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-149
All E.R. 545; [1985] 1 E.G.L.R.164;(1984) 274 E.G.1141 (1985) 135 New Appleby v. Myers (1867) L.R. 1 C.P. 615; L.R. 2 C.P. 651; 35 L.J.C.P. 295; 36 L.J.C.P.
L.J. 205; (1985) 82 L.S.Gaz 2241. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·057, 3·059 331; 14 L.T. 549; 16 L.T. 669; 12 Jur. 500; 14 W.R. 835. . . . . . . 4-010, 4·015, 4-018,
Aluminium Industrie Vaassen B.V. v. Romalpa Aluminium [1976] 1 W.L.R. 676; 4·019, 4-032, 4·232, 4·233, 4·236, 4·251, 4·253, 4·255, 11·003, 11-006
120 S.J. 95; [1976] 2 All E.R. 552; [1976] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 443; C.A.; affirming Applegate v. Moss; Archer v. Moss [1971] 1 Q.B. 406; [1971] 2 W.L.R. 541;sub nom.
(1975) 119 S.J. 318. . 11·055, 11·056, 11·058, 13·103, 13·127 Archer v. Moss; Applegate v. Moss (1970) 114S.J. 971; [1971] 1 All E.R. 747;
Amalgamated Building Contractors v. Waltham Holy Cross U.D.C. [1952] W.N. [115 S.J. 764], C.A..................................... 4·294, S.128
400; [1952] 2 T.L.R. 269; 96 S.J. 530; [1952] 2 All E.R. 452; 50 L.G.R. 667, Arab African Energy Corp. v. Olie Producten Nederland BV [1983] 2 Lloyd's Rep.
C.A.; affirming [1952] 1 T.L.R. 1165; 50 L.G.R. 429. . . . . . . . . . . 10·036, 10·083, 419; [1983] Com. L.R. 195 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . · . . . 18,081
10·084, 10·085, 10·086, 10-087 Archdale(James) &Co. v. Comservices [1954] 1 W.L.R. 459;98S.J.143 [1954] 1 All
Amalgamated Investment& Property Co. v. Walker (John) & Sons [1977] 1 W.L.R. E.R. 210, C.A. [1953] 6 Build L.R. 52, C.A................... 15,018, 15-019
164; (1976) 32 P. & C.R. 278, C.A..... . ...... 1·094, 1·107 Archital Luxfer v. Boot (Henry) Construction [1981} 1 Lloyd's Rep. 642. . 18·186, 18·190
American Fidelity v. Pavia Byrne (1981) 393 S.E. (2d) 830 Louisiana 1·305 Architectural Installation Services v. James Gibbons Windows 16 Con. L.R. 68; 46
Amey Finance Ltd. v. Artes Studios (1989) 15 N.S.W.L.R. 564 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10·018 BLR 91. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . U.007, 12-010, 12·050
Amey-UDC Finance Ltd. v. Austen (1986) 162 C.L.R. 170. . . . . . . . . . . 10-018, 10·020 Archivent Sales & Developments v. Strathclyde Regional Council (1985) 27 Build.
Anangel Atlas Compania Naviera S.A. v. Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy Industries L.R. 98, Ct. of Session, OulerHse................ . . . 11·006, 11·054, U,057
Co. Ltd. (No. 2) [1990] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 526 . . . . . . . . . 1·069 Arcos Industries Pty. v. Electricity Commission of New South Wales (1973) 12
Ancher Mortlock v. Hooker Homes Pty. Ltd. [1971] 2 N.S.W.L.R. 278 ..... 2-280, 2·281 Build. L.R. 65, N.S.W.C.A ..... 3·014, 3·016, 7·016, 7·020, 7·116, 8·006, 8·024, 8·037
Anchor Brewhouse Developments Ltd. v. Berkley House (Docklands) Develop- Arenson v. Arenson. See Arenson v. Casson, Beckman Rutley & Co.
ments Ltd. (1987) 38 Build. L.R. 82; (1988) 4 Const. L.J. 29 284 E.G. - - v. Casson, Beckman Rutley & Co. [1977] A.C. 405; [1975] 3 W.L.R. 815; 119
625 . 1.J42 S.J. 810; [1975] 3 All E.R. 901; [1976] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 179, H.L.; reversing sub
Anchorage Asphalt Paving Co. v. Lewis (1981) 629 P(2d) 65 .......... , . 8·151,8-152 nom. Arenson v. Arenson [1973] Ch. 346; [1973] 2 W.L.R. 553; [1973] 2 All
Anderson v. Tuapeka (1900) 19 N.Z.L.R. 1. . . . . . . . . . . 10·039, 10·044,,..10·071, 10.073, E.R. 235; 117 S.J. 247; sub nom. Arenson v. Arenson and Casson, Beckman,
10·080, 10.()81, 10·082;>10·085, 10-089 Rutley & Co. [1973] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 104; [123 New L.J. 703],
Anderson (W.B.) & Sons Ltd. v Rhodes [1967] 2 All E .. R. 850 . . . . . . . 1·280 C.A.. . . . . . . . . . . . 1·130, 1·302, 1·303, 2·216, 2·220, 2·221, 6·228, 18·063, 18-071
 xi viii TABLE OF CASES TABLE OF CASES xlix
Argyll (Duchess of) v. Beuselinck [1972] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 172 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·091 Auto Concrete Curb Ltd. v. South Nation River Conservation Authority (1992) 89
Arkwright v. Newbold (1881) 17 Ch.D. 324; 49 L.J.Ch. 684;42 L.T. 729; 28 W.R. 828; D.L.R 4th 393 ............... 1·161A, 1·161B, 1·296B, 1·3068, 1·306C, 4·062
(1881) 18 Ch.D. 301, 313; 50 L.J.Ch. 372, 44 L.T. 393; 29 W.R. 455, C.A. . . 1·146 Ayr Road Trustees v. Adams (1883) 11 Ct. of Sess. Cas. ( 4th Ser.) R.. . 6·036, 6.050, 6.168
Armitage v. Palmer(1960) 175 E.G. 315, C.A.;affirming (1958) 173 E.G. 91; [1959] Azzopardi v. Tasman UEB Industries Ltd. [1985) 4 N.S.W.L.R 139 18· 176
C.L.Y. 317 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , ........ 2·095, 2·152
Armstrong v. Jones (1869), Hudson Building Contracts (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 6 . . . . 2·215
Arnhold v. Att.-Gen. of Hong Kong, 47 BLR 129; (1989) 5 Const. L.J. B.L. Holdings v. Wood (Roberts, J.) and Partners (1979) 123 SJ. 570; (1979) 12
263. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.018, 10·019, 10·023, 10·060, 10·061 Build. L.R. 1, C.A.; reversing [1978] J.P.L. 833; (1978) 10 Build. L.R. 48;
Arnold v. Walker (1859) 1 F. & F. 671; 115 R.R. 962 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10·072 (1978) 122 SJ. 525 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·154
Arterial Drainage Co. v. Rathangan Drainage Board (1880) 6 L.R. Ir. 513... 4·146, 6·014 B.P.Exploration Co. (Libya) v. Hunt (No. 2) [1983] 2A.C. 352; (1982] 2 W.L.R. 253;
Aruna Mills v. Dhanrajmal Gobindram [1968] 1 Q.B. 655; [1968] 2 W.L.R. 101; 111 [1983} 1 AllE.R. 925;H.L.;affirming[198lJ 1 W.L.R. 232; (1980) 125 S.J.165,
S.J. 924; [1968] 1 All E.R.133; [1968] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 304 . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·147 C.A.; affirming [1979} 1 W.L.R. 783; (1979) 123 S.J. 455 .. 1·264, 4·241, 4·242, 4·263
Ashdown v. Williams(Samuel) &Sons Ltd. [1957] 1 Q.B.409;[1956] 3 W.L.R.1104; B.P. Refinery (Western Port) Pty. Ltd. v. Hastings Shire Council (1978) 52 A.L.J.R.
lOOS.J. 945; [1957] 1 AUE.R. 35; [101 S.J. 278;73L.Q.R.142;20M.L.R.181; 20.... 1·184
21 M.L.R. 78], C.A.; varying [1956] 2 Q.B. 580; [1956} 3 W.L.R. 128; [1956] B.T.P. Tioxide v. Pioneer Shipping and Armada Marine S.A.; Nema, The. See Pion-
2 All E.R. 384; 100 S.J. 420 [72 L.Q.R. 470; 19 M.L.R. 532; [1966] C.LJ. eer Shipping v. B.T.P. Tioxide.
153] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·329 BWP (Architectural) Ltd. v. Beaver Building Systems 42 BLR 86 ...... , . 6·207
Ashville Investments v. Elmer Contractors [1989] Q.B. 488, C.A.......... 1·126, 6·063, Babanaft International Co. S.A. v. Avanti Petroleum Inc; Ottenia, The [1982] 1
6·094, 18·007, 18,101, 18·107 W.L.R. 871; (1982) 126 SJ. 361; [1982] 3 All E.R 244; [1982] Com. L.R. 104;
Ashwell & Nesbitt v. Allen (1912) Hudson Building Contracts (4th ed.) Vol. 2. [1982] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 99; (1982) 79 L.S.Gaz. 953, C.A.; affirming [1982] 1
462. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·061, 6·015 6·016 7·005 7·055 Lloyd's Rep. 448; [1982) Com. L.R. 40. . . . . . . . . . . . 4·135, 6·185, 18·056, 18·057
Asia Construction Co. v. Crown Pacific (1988) 44 BLR 135. . . . . . 18· i38, 18°142, i8· 149, Babbage v. Coulburn (1882) 9 Q.B.D. 235; 52 L.J.Q.B. 50; 46 L.T. 283; 30 W.R.
18·159E 950 . . . . . . . . 6·039
Asphaltic Limestone Co. v. Glasgow Corporation 1907 S.C. 463 . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-008 Babcock v. Lawson (1880) 5 Q.B.D. 284; 49 L.J.Q.B. 408; 42 L.T. 289; 28 W.R. 591,
Associated Bulk Carriers v. Koch Shipping Inc.; The Fuohsan Maru [1978] 2 All C.A. 1-146
E.R. 254; (1977) 122 S.J. 708; [1978] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 24; (1977) 7 Build. L.R. Badery v. Consolidated Bank (1888) 38 Ch.D. 238; 57 LJ.Ch. 468; 59 L.T. 419; 36
18, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·091 W.R. 745; 3 T.L.R. 60 . . . . . 14·046
Astor Chemicals v. Synthetic Technology [1990] B.C.C. 97; [1990] B.C.L.C. 1 . . . 16·024 Badger Chiyoda v. C.B.I. N.Z. [1989] 2 N.Z.L.R. 599 . . . .18·082A
Astra Vencedor Compania Naviera S.A. of Pamama v. Mabanaft GmbH; Damia- Badgley v. Dickson (1886) 13 A.R. 494 (Canada) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·088, 2·215
nos, The [1971} 2 Q.B. 588; [1971) 3 W.L.R. 24; 115 S.J. 284;sub nom. Astro Bagot v. Stevens, Scanlan & Co. [1966} 1 Q.B. 197; [1964] 3 W.L.R. 1162; 108 S.J.
Vencedor Compania Na vi era S.A. v. Mabanaft GmbH [1971 J1 Lloyd's Rep. 604; [1964] 3 All E.R. 577; [1964] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 353............. 1·372, 2·083
602; [1971} 2 All E.R. 1301, C.A .......................... 18·007, 18·096 Baily v. De,.Crespigny (1868) L.R. 4 Q.B. 180. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·233, 4·262
Ata ulHaq v. City Council of Nairobi [1959] P.C. Appeal No. 48; (1962) 28BLR 76 Bailey v. Thurston & Co. Ltd. [1903] 1 K.B.137;72 L.J.K.B. 36; 88L.T. 43;51 W.R.
. P.C............ 1·247, 5·034, 5·045, 5,047, 6·052, 6·056, 6·081, 6-092, 8·115, 8·116 162; 19 T.L.R. 75. . . . . . . .... 16·004, 16·059
Atkms v. Scott (1980) 7 Const. L.J. 215, C.A ................... 5·061 8,131 8·139 --v. Wilkins(1849)7C.B.886 . . . . . . . . . . 2·069
Atkinson & Forbes Ltd. v. Nelson Hospital Board (1982) (Unrep.), High Cou;t of ' Baker v. Gray (1856) 17 C.B. 462; 25 L.J.C.P. 161; 2Jur.{N.s.) 400; 4 W.R. 297; 104
New Zealand, Nelson Registry N32-80 October 11, 1982 . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·052 R.R 756 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11·008, 11·012, 11·040, 12·063
Atlas Construction Co. Ltd. v. City of Montreal (1954] Que. S.C. 350; (1954) 4 - - v. Yorkshire, etc., Insurance Co. [1892] 1 Q.B. 144; 61 L.J.Q.B. 838; 66 L.T.
D.L.R. (~d) 124. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·158, 1·166, 3·077, 3·078, 4·143 161 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·025
Att.-Gen. v. Bnggs (1855) 1 Jur.(N.s.) 1084. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-030 6·021 6·172 Baldasaro & McGregor Ltd. v. The Queen, Re. (1975) 48 D.L.R. (3d) 517 . . . . . 4·256
--v. Draper's Co. (1869) L.R. 9 Eq. 69; 21 L.T. 651. ................ '2·257: 2·266 Baldwin's Ltd. v. Halifax Corporation (1916) 85 L.J.K.B. 1769........... 4·265, 4·266
- v . McLeod (1893) 14 N.S.W.L.R. 246. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , ... 7·060, 7,063 Balfour v. Barty-King; Hyder & Sons (Builders), Third Parties [1957] 1 Q.B. 496;
Att.-Gen. (British Guiana) v. Serrao (1965) 7 W.I.R. 404, West Indies . . . . . . . . 10·006 (1957] 2 W.L.R. 84; [1957] 1 All E.R.156; 101 S.J. 62; [1956] 2 Lloyd's Rep.
Att.-Gen. (Canada) v. Laminated Structures (1961) 28 D.L.R. 92......... 4·078, 4·120 646; [101 S.J. 362], C.A.;affirming [1956) 1 W.L.R. 779; 100 S.J. 472; [1956] 2
Att.-Gen. of Hong Kong v. Aoki Construction Co. Ltd. [1983] Build. L.R. 81, Hong All E.R. 555; [1956} l Lloyd's Rep. 600 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·387
Kong Ct. of Justice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·104 Balfour Beatty Building Ltd. v. Chestermount Properties Ltd. (1993) 62
- - v. Ko Hon Mau (Trading As Ko's Construction Company) 44 BLR 144, BLR 1 ................. 1·219, 2·172, 10·039, 10·046A, 10·090, 10·094, 18·005
C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12·097 Ball v. London County Council [1949) 2 K.B.159; 65T.L.R. 533; 113 J.P. 315; 93 S.J.
- - v. Wang Chong Construction (1991) 7 Const. L.J. 310. . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·003, 6·054 404; [1949) 1 AllE.R. 1056,47 L.G.R. 591; [206 L.T. 373; 93 S.J. 385; 1141.P.J.
Attwood v. Emery (1856) 1 C.B.(N.s.) 110;26L.J.C.P. 73;28L.T.(o.s)85;5W.R.19; 280; 65 L.Q.R. 518; 12M.L.R. 500; 13 Conv. 394]; C.A.; reversing [1948] 2All
107 R.R. 595 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9·025, 9,027, 9·028 E.R. 917 . . 1·314
--v. Small (1838) 6 CL & Fin. 232; 7 E.R. 684;sub nom. Small v. Attwood 2Jur. Ballantine v. Western Hotels (Pty.) (1960) 1960 (4) S.A. 137. . . . . . . . . . . . 6-092, 6.081
226, 246, H.L., varying (1832) You. 407; subsequent proceedings (1838) 3 Y. Banbury Railway Co. v. Daniel (1884) W.N. 243; 54 L.J.Ch. 265; 33 W.R. 321 ... 11·023,
& C. Ex. 501; (1840) 6 CL & Fin. 523 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·163 11·026, 11·031, 11·038, 11·040, 11·042, 11·044, 11·059
Auburn Municipal Council v. ARC Engineering (1973) N.S.W.L.R. Bank Mellat v. Helleniki Techniki S.A. [1984] Q.B. 291; [1983] 3 W.L.R. 783; (1983)
513 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·112, 2·129, 5·060, 8·119, 8,129, 8·131, 8·137 127 S.J. 618; [1983] 3 All E.R. 428; (1983] Com. L.R. 273; (1983) 133 New L.J.
A ugh ton Ltd. (formerly Aughton Group Ltd.) v. M.F. Kent Services Ltd. (1991) 57 597, C.A.; affirming [1983] Com. L.R. 174. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,082, 18·082A
BLR 1; [1992] A.D.R.L.J.; (1993) 9 Const. L.J.104 ....... 13·106, 18·027, 18·032, Bank of Montreal v. Bail Ltee (1992) 93 D.L.R. (4th) 490 1·161B
18·033, 18·034 Bank of New Zealand v. Simpson (1900) A.C. 182; 69 L.J.P.C. 22; 82 L.T. 102; 48
Aurel Porras Ltd. v. Graham Karp Developments Ltd. [1975] V.R. 202, W.R. 591; 16 T.L.R. 211 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-237
Victoria. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·256, 10.037 Bankline Ltd. v. Arthur Capel [1919] A.C. 435 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·236, 4·262
Auriemia Ltd. v. Haigh and Kinrose Ltd. (1988) 4 Const. L.J. 200 . . . . . . . . . . . 1·078 Barclays Bank Ltd. v. Simms (W.J.) Son and Cooke (Southern) Ltd. [1980] Q.B.
Austin v. Guardians ofBethnal Green (1874) L.R. 9 C.P. 91; 43 L.J.C.P. 100; 29 L.T. 677; (1980] 2 W.L.R. 218; (1979) 123 S.J. 785; [1979] 3 AllE.R. 522; [1980] 1
807;22W.R.406;38J.P.248 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~···'· .. 1·088 Lloyd's Rep. 225 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·261, 16·022
Australasian Conference Association Ltd. v. Mainline Construction Pty. Ltd; (in Barclays Mercantile Business Finance Ltd. v. Sibec Developments Ltd. [1992] 1
liq.) 1979) 53 A.L.J.R. 66 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17·005 W.L.R.1253............. 16·026
 TABLE OF CASES TABLE OF CASES Ii
Barlett v. Vinor (1692) Carth. 251 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·273 Bentley (Dick) Productions Ltd. v. Smith (Harold) (Motors) Ltd. [1965] 1 W.L.R.
Barnett v. Capetown Foreshore Board 1960 (4) S.A. 439 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-276 623; [1965] 2 All E.R. 65; 109 S.J. 329, C.A.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·212, 1·214
Barque Quilpue v. Brown [1904] 2 Q.B. 264; 73 L.J.K.B. 596; 90 L.T. 765; 9 Asp. Bentsen v. Taylor [1893] 2 Q.B. 274; 63 LJ.Q.B. 13; 69 L.T. 487; 42 W.R. 8; 9 T.L.R.
H.L.C. 596; 9 Com. Cas.13, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·186, 4·136 552; 4 R. 510 . . . . . 4-227
Barrie Gas Co. v. Sullivan (1880) 5 A.R. 110 (Canada) ............ 4-015, 4·018, 4·035 Beresford (Lady) v. Driver (1852) 22 L.J.Ch. 407; 16 Beav. 134; 92 R.R. 151 . . . . 2-271
Barter, ex parte., re Walker (1884) 26 Ch.D. 510; 53 L.J.Ch. 802; 51 L.T. 811; 32 W.R. Berkshire Senior Citizens Housing Association v. Pitt (McCarthy E.) and National
809....... ,, ...... 11·040, 12·065, 12·077, 12·078, 16·037, 16·038, 16·040, 16·041 Westminster Bank (Trustees of the estate of Anthony Cripps, deed.) (1979)
Barton v. Piggott (1874) L.R. 10 Q.B. 86; 44 L.J.M.C. 5; 31 L.T. 404; 23 W.R 15 Build. L.R. 27, C.A. 18·112
233 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·279 Berley (E.) Industries v. City of New York 385 N.E. (2d) 281 (1978) 8·186
Basildon District Council v. Lesser (J.E.) (Properties) [1985] Q.B. 839; [1984J 3 Bevan (George) Enterprises Ltd. v. Robert Patrick Ltd. (1988) 7 A.C.L.R. 34.... 12·037,
W.L.R. 812; [1985] 1 All E.R. 20; (1984) 1 Const. L.J. 57; (1987) 8 Con. L.R. 12-040, 12-041
89; (1984) 134 New L.J. 330; (1984) 81 L.S.Gaz. 1437........ 3·026, 3·027, 3·028, Bevan Investments v. Blackball & Struthers {1977) 11 Build. L.R. 78,
3·032, 4·073, 4·097 N.Z.C.A.. . . . . . . . . . . 1·276, 2·112, 2-113, 2·119, 2-213, 5·060, 8·108, 8·119, 8·129,
Baskett v. Bendigo Gold Dredging Co. (1902) 21 N.Z.L.R. 166......... 10·035, 10·039, 8·131, 8-137, 8·143, 8·149
10·046A, 10.055, 10·056 Bickerton & Sons Ltd. v. N.W. Metropolitan Regional Hospital Board. See North
Bateman (Edward L.) v. Liquidator, Reed (Eric) (Pvt.) 1960 (4) S.A. 151 . . . . . . 11·009 West Metropolitan Regional Hospital Board v. Bickerton (T.A.) & Sons
Bateman (Lord) v. Thompson (1875) (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 36. . . . . . . . 5·012, 5·013, 5·045, Ltd.
5·055, 5·057, 6·001, 6·030, 6-049, 6·050, 6·051, 6·052, 6·058, 6·163 Biggin&Co. v. Pennanite (Wiggins& Co., Third Parties) [1951J2K.B.314; [1951] 2
Bates (Thomas) & Son Ltd. v. Wyndham's (Lingerie) Ltd. [1981] 1 W.L.R. SOS; T.L.R.159; 95 S.J.414; [1951 J 2 AllE.R.191; [101 L.J. 131; 68L.Q.R. 5], C.A.;
[1981) I All E.R.1077; (1980) 125 S.J. 32; (1980) 257 E.G. 381; (1980) 41 P. & reversing in part [1951] 1 K.B. 422; [1950) 2 All E.R. 859; sub nom. Biggio &
C.R. 345, C.A.; affirming (1979) 39 P. & C.R 517. . . . . . 1·052, 1·111, 1·114 1·123 Co. and Archibald Bathgate (Building Materials) v. Pennanite, 66 T.L.R.
Batten v. White (1960) 12 P. & C.R. 66 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '3·060 (Pt. 2) 944 .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . .. . !5·057
Batterbury v. Vyse (1863) 2H. & C. 42;332L.J.Ex.177; 8 L.T. 283; 9Jur.(N.s.) 754; Billings (A.C.) & Sons Ltd. v. Riden (1958] A.C. 240; [1957] 3 W.L.R. 496; [1957] 3
11 W.R. 891; 133 R.R. 583 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·108 All E.R. 1, 101 S.J. 645; [73 L.Q.R. 433; 21 M.L.R. 76; 107 L.J. 643; 101 SJ.
Batty v. Metropolitan Property Realisations Ltd. [1978] Q.B. 554; [1978] 2 W.L.R. 722]; H.L.; affirming sub nom. Riden v. Billings (A.C.) & Sons [1957] 1 Q.B.
500; [1978) 2 All E.R. 445; (1977) 122 S.J. 63; (1977) 245 E.G. 43; (1977) 7 46; [1956) 3 W.L.R. 704; [1956) 3 All E.R. 357; 100 S.J. 748; [106 L.J. 707; IOI
Build. L.R. 1, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.373 S.J. 524; 73 L.Q.R. 294; 20 M.L.R. 288]; [1956) C.L.Y. 5837, C.A. .... 1-308, 1·314,
Baylis v. Wellington City of (1886) 4 N.Z.L.R. C.A. 84............... 10·047, 10·049 1·316
Baytur S.A. v. Finagro Holdigns S.A. [1992] 1 Q.B. 610; [1991] 3 W.L.R. 866; [1991] Billyack v. Leyland Construction Co. [1968] 1 W.L.R.471; 112S.J. 274; [1968] 1 All
4 All E.R.129; (1991) 135 S.J. (LB) 52; [1992] 1 Lloyd's Rep.134; The Times, E.R. 783; 66 L.G.R. 506. . . . . . . . . . 2·058, 4· 120, 5·013, 5·014, 5·016, 5·045, 5·055,
June 21, 1991; Financial Times, June 26, 1991; The Independent, June 19, 5·057, 6·004, 6,016, 6·035, 6·046, 6·052, 6,056, 6-058, 6·059
1991, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14·039, 18·124, 18·125 Bilodeau v. Bergeron [1975] 2 S.C.R. 345..... 1·292A, 1·297, 1·301, 1·306A, 1·383, 5-024
Beaman v. A.R.T.S. [1949] 1 K.B. 530; 65 T.L.R. 389; 93 S.J. 236; [1949] 1 All E.R. Bilton (Percy) v. Greater London Council [1982] 1 W.L.R. 794; (1982) 126 S.J. 397;
465; [92 S.J. 432; 207 L.T. 275; 65 L.Q.R. 292J C.A.; reversing [1948] W.N. [1982] 2 All E.R. 623; [1982] 80 L.G.R. 617; (1982) 20 Build. L.R. 1, H.L.;
224; 64 T.L.R. 285; [1948] 2 All ER. 89 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·294 affirming [1981] 79 L.G.R. 463; (1981) 17 Build. L.R. 1,
Beattie v. Gilroy (1882) 10 Ct. of Sess. Cas. (4th ser.) R. 226; 20 Sc.L.R. C.A.. . . . . 1 ·220, 2·174, 4· 192, 4· 193, 4-195, 10·091A, 13·074, 13·080, 13-082, 13·085,
162. ...................... . . . ... 2-072 2·288 13-088
Beck v. Montana Constructions Pty. Ltd. [1964-65] N.S.W.R. 229. . . . 2·277, 2·278'. 2·280 Binnie and Partners International v. Swire Clemsyn [1983] Build. L.R. 92, Hong
Beddow v. Beddow (1878) 9 Ch.D. 89; 47 L.J.Ch. 588; 26 W.R. 570 . . . . . . . . . . 18.129 Kong High Ct. of Justice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·104
Beerv.Bowden [1981] 1 W.L.R.522; [1981] 1 AllE.R.1071; (1976)41P.&C.R.317, Birch v. Clifford (1891) 8 T.L.R. 103 . . . . . . . . . . . . 5·042
C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·047, 1·051, 1·052, 1·054 Bird v. McGaheg (1849) 2 C. & K. 707. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·248, 2·256
Beeston v. Marriott (1864) 4 Gitt. 436; 9 Jur.(N.s.) 960; 2 N.R. 437; 11 W.R. 896; 8 - v . Smith (1848) 12 Q.B. 786; 17 L.J.Q.B. 309; 12 Jur. 916 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·055
L.T. 690; 141 R.R. 268. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11·023, 11-036, 11·037 Birdseye v. Dover Harbour Commissioners, Hudson Building Contracts (4th ed.)
Begley v. Att.-Gen. of New South Wales (1910) 11 C.L.R. 43 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17·012 Vol. 2, p. 76. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , , ........... 2·072, 2·288
Behn v. Burness (1862) 1 B. & S. 877 (1863) 3 B. & S. 751; 2 New Rep. 184; 32 Birkensbaw, ex parte., re Allison [1904] 2 K.B .. 327; 73 L.J.K.B. 763; 91 L.T. 66; 20
L.J.Q.B. 204; 8 L.T. 207; 9 Jur.(N.s.) 620, 11 W.R. 496; 1 Mar L.C. 329; 122 T.L.R. 493 2·247
E.R.281,Ex.Ch.............................. 1·140 Birmingham Association of Building Trade Employers' Agreement Re, L.R. 4 R.P.
Beigtheil and Young v. Stewart (1900) 16 T.L.R. 177 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·080 54; [1963] 1 W.L.R. 484; 107 S.J. 318; (1963] 2 All E.R. 361; 107 S.J.
Bell v. Lever Bros. Ltd. [1932] A.C. 161; 101 L.J.K.B. 129; 146 L.T. 258; 48 T.L.R. 318. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·203, 2·071, 3·081, 8·008
133; 76 S.J. SO; 37 Com. Cas. 98, H.L.; reversing {1931] 1 K.B. Birmingham & District Land Co. v. London & North Western Ry. Co. (1888) 40
557. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·094, 1·096, 1·102, 1·105, 1·148, 3-077, 4·233 Ch.D. 268; [1886--90] All E.R. Rep. 620; 60 L.T. 527; C.A.. . . . . . . . . 1·090, 1·256
--v. London & North Western Ry. (1852) 15 Beav. 548; 19 L.T.(o.s.) 292; 92R.R Bishop and Baxter Ltd. v. Anglo Eastern Trading & Industrial Co. Ltd. [1944) 1
538 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-047 K.B.12; [1943) 2All E.R. 598; 113 L.J.K.B. 26; 169 L.T. 351; 60T.L.R. 37; 88
Bellamy v. Davey [1891] 3 Ch. 540; 60 L.J.Ch. 778; 65 L.T. 308; 40 W.R.118; 7T.L.R. S.J. 34, C.A. . . . 1-044
1?5.. . . . . .......................... 11·008, 11·009, 11-062 Bishop (W.I.) Ltd. v. J. Maclaren Co. [1937) 2 D.L.R. 625. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·140, 1·166
Belle River Commumty Arena Inc. v. Kaufmann (W.J.C.) Co. Ltd. (1978) 87 Bjornstad v. Duse Shipbuilding Co. [1924] 2K.B. 673; 93 L.J.K.B. 977; 131 L.T. 663;
D.L.R. (3d) 761; (1978) 20 O.R. (2d) 447, Ontario C.A ............ 1·025 1·108 30 Com. Cas. 14; 68 S.J. 754; 40T.LR. 636; 19 Ll.L. Rep. 7 . . . . . . . . . . . 18·036
Bellgrove v. Eldridge {1954) A.L.R. 929. . . . . . . . 8· 120, 8· 123, 8-126, 8· 127, 8· 134,'8-140, Black v. Christchurch Finance [1894] A.C. 48 .......... '. . . 1·387
8·141,8-142 Blackford & Sons (Caine) v. Christchurch Corporation (1962) 106 S.J. 263; 60
Bennet v. Capetown Foreshore Board 1960 (4) S.A. 439 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,045 L.G.R. 214; sub nom. Blackford & Sons (Caine) v. Christchurch Borough
Bennet & White (Calgary) v. Municipal District of Sugar City No. 5 [1951 JA.C. 786, (1962J 1 Lloyd's Rep. 349, 182 E.G. 623. . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·134, 6·224, 8·062, 8·065
P.C.. · · - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-006, 11,029, 11·032, 11·033, 11·037 Blackpool Borough Council v. Parkinson (1991) 58 BLR 85. . . . . . . . . . 18·043, 18·059
Benstrete Construction v. Angus Hill (1987) 38 Build. L.R. 115; (1988) 4 ConsL· L.J. Blackpool & Fylde Aero Club v. Blackpool Borough Council [1990J 1 W.L.R 1195;
114, C.A.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·06¢;;6·094, 6·095 [1990] 3 All E.R. 25; 88 L.G.R. 864; (1991) 155 LG. Rev. 246; (1991) 3
Bentley v. The State 41 N.W. 338 (1889) Wisconsin . . . 4-061 Admin. L.R. 322, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·019, 1·022, J.053
 r
Iii
If TABLE OF CASES liii
TABLE OF CASES

Blair v. Osborne. & Tompk!ns [1971] 2 Q.B. 78; [1971] 2 W.L.R. 503; 114 S.J. 865;sub BowmakersLtd. v. Barnet Instruments [1945] 1 K.B. 65; 114LJ.K.B.41; 172L.T.1;
nom. Blrur v. Tomkms (Alan S.) and Osborne (Frank) (Trading as Osborne 61 T.L.R. 62; 89 S.J. 22; (1944] 2 All E.R. 579 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-276
& Tomkins (A firm)) [1971] 1 All E.R. 468, C.A ............ 2·276 2·277 2·278 Box Hill (The City of) v. E.W. Tavschke [1974] VR 39 ... 1·041, 1·059, 3-059, 3·061, 3·067
Blake v. Izard (1867) 16 W.R. 108. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ll-024, 1i·026, l.1-046 Boyajian v. U.S. 423 F. (2d) 1231 (1970). . ...... 4-261, 7·118, 8-196, 8·201, 8·203
Blanchard v. Sun Fire Office (1890) 6 T.LR. 365 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,130 Bozson v. Altrincham Urban Council (1903) 67 J.P. 397; 1 L.G.R 639.......... 3-057,
Blay v. Pollard & Morris [1930] 1 K.B. 628; [1930] All E.R. Rep. 609; 99 L.J.K.B: 3·065, 3.oo;
421, 143 L.T. 92; 74 S.J. 284, C.A.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-100 1·101 Brace v. Wehnert (1856) 25 Beav. 348; 27 LJ.Ch. 572; 4 Jur.(N.s) 549; 6 W.R. 425;
Blecick v. Sch~ol_District of Cochise County 405 P.(2d) 750 (1965) . . . . . . . . . . '1-295 119 R.R. 442. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·300, 6·021
Blewman v. W1lkmson {1979] 2N.Z.L.R. 208, C.A . . . . . . . . . . . . ."......... 1·344 ~radbury v.Morgan (1862) 1 H. & C. 249, 31 L.J.Ex.462; 7L.T.104; lOW.R. 776;8
Blexen v. G. Percy Trentham 54 BLR 37; [1990] 42 E.G. 133; 21 Con L 61, Jur.(N.s) 918; 130 R.R. 489; 158 E.R. 877. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.030, 1·031
. C.A..... - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·178, 18-181, 18·185, 18·190, 18·195 Bramall & Ogden v. Sheffield City Council (1983) 29 Build. L.R. 73
Bliss v. South East Thames Regional Health Authority [1987] 1 C.R. 700; [1985] o.c.. . . . . . . . . . . . 10-023, 10-043, 10-061
I.R.L.R. 308, C.A.; reversing (1984) 134 New LJ. 121 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·160 Brandt's Sons & Co. v. Dunlop Rubber Co. [1905] A.C. 454; 74 LJ.K.B. 898; 93 L.T.
Bloemen (F.J.) Pty. v. Council of the City of Gold Coast [1973] A.C. 115; [1972] 3 495; 21 T.L.R. 710; 11 Com. Cas. 1 . . . 14·048
W.L.R. 43; 116 S.J. 395; [1972} 3 All E.R. 357, P.C............... 4·227, 8·100 Brantford (City of) v. Kemp and Wallace-Carruthers and Associates (1960) 23
Blue Cir7le Industries v. Holland Dredging Co. (U.K.) (1987) 37 Build. LR. 40; The D.L.R. (2d) 640, C.A.; affem;ng (1959) 21 D.L.R. (2d) 670......... 2-045, 2-100
T~mes'. ~arch 23, 1987. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-036, 7,083 Braunstein v. Accidental Death Insurance Co. (1861) 1 B. & S. 782; 31 L.J.Q.B.17; 5
Blyth Shipbmlding and Dry Docks Co. Ltd., Re; Forster v. Blyth Shipbuilding and
L.T. 550; 8 Jur. 506; 124 R.R. 745 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·025
Dry Docks Co. Ltd. [1926J Ch. 494; 95 L.J.Ch. 350; 134 L.T. 643. . . 11-012, 11 ·040
Brazendale & Co. v. Saint Freres S.A. [1970] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 34......... 18·106, 18·108
Boast v. Firth (1868) L.R. 4 C.P. 1; 38 L.J.C.P. l; 19 L.T. 264; 17 W.R. 29 . . . . . . 4-271
Bognuda v. '!)pton & ~hearer [1972] 2 N.Z.L.R. 741 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·344 Brecknock Navigation Co. v. Pritchard (1796) 6 T.R. 750; 3 R.R. 335 . . . . . . . . . 4-250
Bolam v. Fnern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 1 W.L.R. 582; 101 S.J. Bremer Vulkan Schiffbau und Maschinenfabrik v. South India Shipping Corp;
.. 357; [1957] 2 All E.R. 118; [101 S.J. 291] ...................... 2·087, 2·102 Gregg v. Raytheon. Sub nom. Gregg v. Raytheon; Bremer Vulkan Schiffbau
Bohv1nter 011 S.A. v. Chase Manhattan Bank [1984] 1 W.L.R. 392; (1984) 128 SJ. und Maschinenfabrik v. South India Shipping Corp. [1981] A.C. 909; [1981] 2
153; [1984] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 251, C.A.................. 17·067 17·068 17·071 W.L.R. 141; (1981) 125 S.J. 114;[1981) 2A11E.R. 289; [1981] 1 Lloyd's Rep.
Bolland, ex parte., re Winter (1878) 8 Ch.D. 225;47 LJ.B.K. 52; 38 L.T. 362; 26 W.R. ' 253; [1981JCom. L.R.19. H.L.; affirming [1980] 2 W.L.R 905; (1979) 124 S.J.
512 ..... · - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-025, 11-035, 11·036, 11·037, 11·038 396; [1980] 1 All E.R. 420; [1980) 1 Lloyd's Rep. 255, C.A.; affirming
Bolt v. Thomas (1859), Hudson Building Contracts (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 3 ..... 2·232, 2·286 [1979] 3 W.L.R. 471; (1979) 123 S.J. 504; [1979] 3 All E.R. 194; 78
Bolton v. Lambert (1889) 41 Ch.D. 295; 58 L.J.Ch. 425; 60 L.T. 687; 37 W.R. 236, L.S.Gaz. 834. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·007, 18·016, 18-162, 18·198
434; 5 T.L.R. 201, 357 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , 3·072 Brenmar Building Co. Ltd. v. University of Newcastle [19n] December 12,
- v. Mahadeva [1972) 1 W.L.R. 1009; 116 S.J. 564; [1972] 2 All E.R. 1322, unreported . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.037
C.A.. · · .. · · · · - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·013, 4·014, 4·020, 4·021 Breslin v. Hichens [1914] A.D. 312 . . . . . . . . . . 4·079
Bond Worth, Re [1980] Ch. 228; [1979} 3 W.L.R. 629; (1979) 123 S.J. 216; [1979) 3 All Brewer v. Chamberlain May 13, 1949, unreported......... , . . . . .... 2-255, 2·259
E.R. 919; [129NewL.J. 651] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11·053 11·056 11·058 Brewer St. Investments Ltd. v. Barclays Woollen Co. Ltd. [1954) 1 Q.B. 428; [1953]
Bonomiv.Backhouse[l861]9H.L.C.503 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : .... ' 1-342 3 W.L.R. 869; 97 S.J. 796; [1953] 2AIIE.R.1330; [70L.Q.R. 6; 18Conv. 79; 9
Boomer v. Muir~4 ~- 570 (1933) Sup. Ct.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·272, 4·230 Sec. Jo. 66J C.A.; affirming [1953] C.P.L. 231; 171 E.G. 264 . . . . . 4·277
Boot (Henry) Bmldmg v. Croydon Hotel and Leisure Co. (1986) 2 Const. LJ.183; Brice v. Bannister (1878) 3 Q.B.D. 569; 47 L.J.Q.B. 722; 38 L.T. 739; W.R.
(1987) 36 Build. ~.R. 41, C.A.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·075, 6-087, 8·084, 8·086, 16·058 670. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14'°42, 14·046, 14·054
Boot (Henry) Construction v. Central Lancashire New Town Development Cor- Brickfield Properties Ltd. v. Newton; Rose bell Holdings v. Newton [1971] 1 W.L.R.
poration (1980) 15 Build. L.R. 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·228 4·163 862; 115 S.J. 307; [1971} 3 All E.R. 328, C.A.................... 2·083, 2·108
Boot (Henry) & Sons v. London County Council. See London County Council v. ' Bridge v. Campbell Discount Co. [1962] A.C. 600; [1962] 2 W.L.R. 439; 106S.J. 94;
Boot (Henry) & Sons. [1962] 1 AllE.R. 385; [112L.J. 216,231, 316;233 L.T.199; [1962] J.B.L. 252;
Borden (U.K.) v. Scottish Timber Products and McNicol Brownlie [1981] Ch 25· 25 M.L.R. 198] H.L.; reversing sub nom. Campbell Discount Co. v. Bridge
[1979] 3 W.L.R. 672; [1979] 123 S.J. 688; [1979] 3 All E ..R. 961; [1980] i [1961] 1 Q.B. 445; [1961] 2 W.L.R. 596105 S.J. 232; [1961] 2 All E.R. 97; [24
Lloyd's Rep. 160, C.A.; reversing [1979] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 168; (1978) 122 S.J. M.L.R. 502; 105 S.J. 291; 111 L.J. 399, 482; 81 L.Q.R. 86] [1961 J C.L.Y. 3908,
825. · · · - . · · · ·, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11·051, 11-052, 11-053, 11·05_6 C.A............................... . . 10·017, 12-021
Borough of Stratford v. J. H. Ashman Ltd. [1960] N.Z.L.R. 503 ...... 6·001, 6·092 6·163 Brightman & Co. Ltd. v. Tate [1919] 1 K.B. 463; 88 L.J.K.B. 921; 120 L.T. 512; 35
Bos v. tt,elsham ~1866) L.R. 2 Ex. 72; 4 H. & C. 642; 36 L.J.Ex. 20; 15 L.T. 481; 15 ' T.L.R. 209. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·277, 4·280
.R. 259, 143 R.R. 817. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·065 18·066 Brightside Kilpatrick Engineering Service Ltd. v. Mitchell Construction (1973)
Boskalis Westminster Construction v. Liverpool City Council (1983) 24 Build. L.R. '
•~m-um ...................
Bosma v. Larsen [1966] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·289 4·290
•™ [1975] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 493, C.A.. . . . . 1·207, 3-050, 3-051, 3·081, 6·007, 6-008, 6·075,
6·087, 6·088, 6·090, 8·008, 10·041, 10-070, 10-077, 10·095, 13.106, 18·031
Brightside Mechanical & Engineering Services Group Ltd. v. Hyundai Engineering
Bostel Bros. v. Hurlock [1949] 1 K.B. 74; [1948] L.J.R. 1846; 64 T.L.R. 495; 92 S.J. '
& Construction Co. Ltd. (1988) 41 BLR 110 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13·116
361; [1948] 2 All E.R. 312; {99 L.J. 159; 64 L.Q.R. 440], C.A ......... 4·277, 4-280
Bosto~ Deep Sea Fishing Co. v. Ansell (1888) 39 Ch.D. 339; 59 L.T. 345 . . . . . . 12·078 Brinkibon Ltd. v. Stahag Stahl und Stahlwarenhandelsgesellschaft mbH [1983] 2
Botterill v. Wave Guardi~s (1886) 2 T.L.R. 621. .................. , 6·127, 18·129 A.C. 34; [1982] 2 W.L.R. 264; [1982] 1 AIIE.R. 293; (1982) 126 S.J.116; [1982]
Bottoms v. York Corporation (1892) Hudsons Building Contracts (4th ed.) Vol. 2, Com. L.R. 72, H.L.; affirming [1980] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 556 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·040
p. 208; 10th ed. p. 270, C.A.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·166, 4-048, 4-050, 4·143 Brisbane City Council v. Group Projects Ltd. (1979) 145 C.L.R 143, 160, High a. of
Bottomley v. Bannister [1932] 1 K.B. 458; [1931] All E.R. Rep. 49; 101 L.J.K.B. 46; Australia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·234
146 L.T. 68; 48 T.L.R. 39, C.A.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·314 1·321 Bristol Corporation v. Aird (John) & Co. [1913] A.C. 241; 82 L.J.K.B. 684; 109 L.T.
Boulton v. Jones (1857) 2H. & N. 564; 27 L.J.Ex.117; 157E.R. 232;sub nom: B~Iton ' 434; 77 J.P. 209; 29 T.L.R. 360. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·104, 18·119, 18·131

--
v. Jones 30 L.T.(o.s) 188; 3 Jur.(N.s.) 1156; 6 W.R. 107. . . . . . . . . . 1·098 1·101 British Columbia Sawmills v. Nettleship (1868) L.R. 3 C.P. 499; 37 L.J.C.P. 235; 18
Bowden's Patent Syndicate v. Smith (Herbert) & Co. [1904] 2 Ch. 86. . . . . . . . . i4·017 L.T. 604; 16 W.R.1046.................................... 8·109
Bowen v. Paramount Builders [1977] 1 N.Z.L.R. 394, N.Z.C.A........... ':" 1'·276, 1-359 British Crane Hire Corp. Ltd. v. Ipswich Plant Hire Ltd. [1975] Q.B. 303; [1974] 2
Bowers Bros. v. Chapel-en-le-Frith Rural Council (1911) 751.P. 122, 321; 9 L.d'.R. W.L.R. 856; [1974]1 All E.R.1059; (1973) 118 S.J. 387, C.A ........ 1·202, 1-207,

~
15-043. 15,044

I
l
l
 liv TABLE OF CASES
TABLE OF CASES Iv
British Eagle International Air Lines v. Compagnie Nationale Air France [1975] 1
Brunswick Construction v. Nowlan (1975) 49 D.L.R. (3d) 93, Canada Supreme
W.L.~. 75_8; 119 S.J. 368; [1975] 2All E.R. 390; [1975] 2Lloyd's Rep. 43,H.L;
Ct.. 4·080, 4·102, 4·103, 4·111
reversmg mpart [1974} 1 Lloyd's Rep. 429, C.A.; affinning [1973] 1 Lloyd's
Bryant & Son v. Birmingham Hospital Saturday Fund (1938} 1 All E.R.
Rep. 414.. - ....... 8·079, 8-080, 8·081, 8·082, 8·083, 8·084, 8·086, 13·120, 13·125, 503. . . . . . ............... 4·039, 4-049, 8-028, 8·030
13·126, 13·127, 13·131, 14·045, 16·031, 16·045, 16-046, 16-054, Buckingham County Council v. Lovell (Y.J.) & Son [1956] J.P.L. 196. . . . 15·076, 15·017,
.. . 16-055, 16·057, 16·058 15·020
Bnt1sh Electncal and Associated Industries (Cardiff) v. Patley Pressings (Reid
Bros. (Glasgow), Third Party; Douglas Scott, Fourth Party) [1953] 1 W.L.R. Buckland & Garrard v. Fawson & Co. (1890) 6 T.L.R. 421 ............... . 2·257
. . 280; [1953] 1 All E.R. 9_4; 97 S.J. 96; [69 L.Q.R. 290; 17 Conv. 173].... 4·267, 1·044 Bulfield v. Fournier (1894) 11 T.L.R. 62, 282. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·235
Bntish GlanzstoffManufactunng Co. Ltd. v. General Accident Fire and Life Assur - Bulmer v. Gilman (1842) 4 M. & G. 108; 11 L.J.C.P. 174; 4 Sc.(N.s.) 781; 1 D. & L.
ance Corporation Ltd. 1912 S.C. 591; [1913] A.C. 143. . . . . 10-003, 10·004, 10·047, 367; 6 Jur.(o.s.) 761; 61 R.R. 487 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·095
Burden v. Swansea Corporation (1957] 1 W.L.R.1167; 101 S.J. 882; [1957] 3 All E.R.
10·050 243; 55 L.G.R. 381, H.L.; affirming (1956) 54 L.G.R. 161; [1956] C.L.Y. 875
British Movietonews v. London and District Cinemas [1952J A.C. 166; [1951] 2
T.L.R. 571; 95 SJ. 499; [1951] 2 AIIE.R. 617; [210 L.T. 25; 212 L.T.174; 100 C.A.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·063, 6·125, 6·220
L.J. 677; 101 L.J. 676; 14 M.L.R. 85; 15 M.L.R. 85; 1952 S.L.T. 3] H.L.; revers- Burns & Kenealy v. Furby (1885) 4 N.Z.L.R. S.C. 110. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·173, 6·177
2g [1951] 1 K.B. 190; 66 T.L.R. (Pt. 2) 203; 94 S.J. 504; [1950] 2 All E.R. 390, Burr v. Ridout (1893) The Times, February 22
Bush v. Whitehaven Trustees of Port and Town of) (1888), Hudson Building Con·
2·257

.. S.S.
B~t(sh A Investment Trust v. Foundation Co. ..Ltd. (1930)
. December 15 . . · . . .· 13·124
·- tracts (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 122; 52 J.P. 392. . . . . 4-252, 4·257, 4-263
Bntish Steel Corp. v. Cleveland Bridge & Engineering Co. Ltd. [1984] 1 All E.R. Butler v. Egg and Egg Pulp Marketing Board (1966) 114 C.L.R. 185 . . . . . . . . . 8-110
504; (1983) 24Build. L.R. 94; [1982] Com. L.R. 54.......... 1·015 1·051 1·055 Butler Machine Tool Co. Ltd. v. Ex-Cell-O Corp. (England) Ltd. [1979] 1 W.LR.
1·056, 1·268, 1·270, 1·271, 3·071, 8·104, 9-024 9-025 9·030 401; [1979] 1 All E.R. 965; (1977) 121 SJ. 406, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·039
B~~sh Thomson-Houston Co. v. West (1903) 19 T.L.R. 493 ............ 6-016, io,074 Byford v. Russell (1907) 2 K.B. 522; 76 L.J.K.B. 744; 97 L.T. 104 . . . . . . . . . . . . 11·049
Bnttsh Waggon Co. v. Lea (1880) 5 Q.B.D. 149; 49 L.J.Q.B. 321; 42 L.T. 437; 28 Byrne v. Van Tienhoven (1880) 5 C.P.D. 344; 49 L.J.Q.B. 316; 42 L.T. 371; 44 J.P.
. . W.R..349; 441.P. 440. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14·003, 14·004, 14·005, 14-008 667........ . ............ 1-023, 1-029, 3-072
Bnt1sh Westinghouse Co. v. Underground Electric Railways of London [1912] A.C. Bysouth v. Shire of Blackbum (1928) V.R. 562............ 4·215, 6-122, 7·065, 10-013,
673 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · - .... · . . . . . 8·155 10-017, 10-020, 12-002, 12-004, 12-007, 12-010, 12-012, 12-067
Broc~lebank v: Lancashire & Yorkshire Ry. (1887) 3 T.L.R. 575. . . . . . . . . 2·257, 2·266 Bywaters v. Curnick (1906) Hudson Building Contracts (4th ed.) Vol. 2 p. 393. . 4·146,
Brodie v. Cardiff Corporation [1919] A.C.337; 88L.J.K.B. 609; 120L.T.417; 831.P. 4-167,8-073
77; 17 L.G.R. 65, H.L.. . . . . . . . . . . 1·220, 1-271, 4·220, 6·062, 6-067, 6-071, 6·146,
6·091, 7·004, 7·066, 7-068, 7·069, 7·075, 8·134 10-069
Brogden v. Metropolitan Ry. Co. (1877) 2 App. Cas. 666, H.L. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' 1·034 C.C. Smith Co. Inc. v. Frankini Construction Co. 135 N.E. (2d) 924 (1956) 4-224
Bromley London Borough v. Rush and Tompkins Ltd. (1987) 35 Build. L.R 94· C.C.H. v. Mollenhawer (1974) 51 D.L.R. (3d) 638, Sup. Ct., Canada....... 4·084, 4-091
(1985) 1 Const. L.J. 374; [1985] C.I.L.L. 179 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '. C.G. Monkhouse Pty. Ltd. Re. (1968) 69 S.R., N.S.W., 429 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16·054
1·348 COAC v. Kennedy Engineers, 67 Cal. App. (3d) 916 (1977), Califor~a . . . . . . . 1·305
Brook Enterp-?sesLtd. v. Wilding (1973) 38D.L.R. (3d) 472, [1973] 5 W.W.R. 660 1·276
Broom v. Davis (1794) 7 East 480n.j. 103 E.R. 186 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-015 Cable (1956) v. Hutcherson Bros. Pty. (1963) 43 A.L.J.R. 321, Australia High
Brown v. Bateman (1867) L.R. 2 C.P. 272; 36 L.J.C.P. 134; 15 L.T. 658; 15 W.R. Court. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·010, 3·027, 3·032, J.050, 4·072, 4·080, 4-090, 4·091, 4·096
350. · · · · · - · · · · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11·024, 11·026, 11·040, 11-041, 11·046 Calderbank v. Falderbank [1976] Fam. 93; [1975] 3 W.L.R. 586; 119 S.J.490; [1975] 3
- v. Heathcote C.C. [1986] 1 N.Z.L.R. 76.......................... 1·282 All E.R. 333; 5 Fam.Law 190, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·188
--v. John~on (1842) lOM. & W. 331; Car. &M. 440; 11 L.J.Ex. 373; 62R.R 632 10·025 Caledonian Ry. v. Lockhart (1860) 3 Macq. 808; 6 Jur.1311; 3 LT. 65; 8 W.R. 373;
--v. Laune (1~54) 1 L.C. ~ep._343;5 L.C. Rep. 65.................... 2-124 119 R.R. 1101 . . . . . . . . ...... 2·186
- - v. Metropolitan Counties Life Assurance Society (1859) 1 E. & E. 832; 28 Calgary (The City of) v. Northern Construction Ltd. (1986) 2 W. W .R 426; affirmed
L.J.Q.B. 236; 33 L.T.(o.s.) 162; 5 Jur.(N.s.) 1028; 7 W.R. 477 . . . . . . . . . . 14·037 [1987] S.C.C.D. 980, Sup. Ct., Canada. 1·025, 1·097, 1·108, 1·117, 3·072,
- v. Raphael [1958] Ch. 636; [1958] 2 W.L.R. 647; [1958} 2 All E.R. 79; 102 S.J. 8-047, 8·048
269; (108 L.J. 371; 74 L.Q.R. 473; 21 M.L.R. 556; 22 Conv. 297], C.A. . . . . 1·145 - - v. Northern Construction Company Division of Morrison-Knudsen Company
- - v. Rollo (Lord) (1832) 10 Ct. of Sess. Cas. (1st ser.) (Shaw) 667 . . . . . . . . . 7·073 Inc. (1897) 3 Const. L.J. 179, Alberta Court of Appeal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·094
--v. Royal Insurance Society (1859) 1 E. & E. 853;28 L.J.Q.B. 275; 32 L.T.(o.s.) Callisher v. Bischoffsheim (1870) L.R. 5 Q.B. 449, sub nom. Calisher v. Bischoff-
134; 7_W.R. 479; 5 Jur.(N.s.) 1255; 117 R.R. 492 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-250 sheim 39 LJ.Q.B. 181; 18 W.R.1137 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·079
Brown (_Chnstopher) _v. Geno_sse!1schaft Oesterreichischer Waldbesitger Holz- Caltex Oil (Australia) Pty. Ltd. v. Dredge Willemstad, The (1977) 51 A.L.J.R. 270;
wutsch aftsbertiebe Reg1stnerte Genossenschaft mit Beschrankter Haftung (1976) 136 C.L.R. 529, Aust. High Court. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·322, 1·324
[1954] 1 Q.B. 8; [1953] 3 W.L.R 689; 97 S.J. 744; [1953] 2 AllE.R 7039; [1953] Calvert v. London Dock (1838) 2 Keen 638 ................ 17-010, 17·011E, 17-043
2 Lloyd's Rep. 373 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·006 Cambridge Water Co. v. Eastern Counties Leather plc. [1994] 2 W.L.R
Brown & Davis Ltd. v. Galbraith [1972] 1 W.L.R. 997; [1972] 3 AllE.R. 31; 116S."1: 53. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·337, 1·339, 1·344
545; [1972) R.T.R. 523; [1972] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 1, C.A. . . . . . . 1·062 Cameron (A.) Ltd. v. John Mowlem (1990) 52 BLR 24, C.A ......... 6·198, 6·200, 6·202
Brown & Docherty v. Whangarei County [1988] 1 N.Z.L.R. 33. . . . . . . . . . 4·215 6· 121 Cameron-Head v. Cameron & Co. (1919) 1919 S.C. 627, Ct. of Sess. . . . . . . . . . 10·013
6·134, 6·159, 6-168, 12-024,'12-03{} Camilla Cotton Oil Co. v. Granadex S.A.; Shawnee Processors Inc. v. Same [1976] 2
Brown & Huston v. City of York (1983) 5 C.L.R. 240 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·306A Lloyd's Rep. 10, H.L.; reversing (1975) 119 S.J. 115; [1975] 1 Lloyd's Rep.
Browne's Estate Re [1893J 2 Ch. 300; 62 L.J.Ch. 695; 69 L.T. 12; 41 W.R. 440; 3 R. 470, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·103
463. · · · · - . · · · · - - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-012 17·021 Camillo Eitzen and Jewson & Sons, Re (1896) 40 S.J. 438 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-228
Bruce (W.) v. Strong (J.) (A firm) [1951] 2 K.B. 447; 95 S.J. 381; [1951] 1 ·AJl E.R. ' Cammell Laird v. Manganese Bronze & Brass Co. [1934] A.C. 402............ 4·070,
1021; [_1951} 2 Lloyd's Rep. 5, C.A......... 18.048, 18-108, 18·110, 18·111, 18·125 4-072, 4·078, 4·080, 4-084, 4· 107, 4·116
Bruens v. Smith 195~ 1 S.A. L.R. 67................ 5·012, 5·040, 5·055, 6·030, 6·051 Campbell v. Blyton (1893), Hudson Building Contracts (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 234 2·285
Bruns v. Colocotroms; Vasso, The [1979] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 412 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17·012 Campbell Discount Co. v. Bridge. See Bridge v. Campbell Discount Co.
Brunsden v. Beresford (1883) 1 C. & E. 125 . . . . . . . . . . 6·117 Campbell Flour Mills v. Bowes and Ellis (1914) 32 O.R. 270. . . . . . . . 1-379, 1·380, 8-222
Brunsdon v. Staines Local Board (1884) 1 C. & E. 272 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .• 7·064 Camprell v. Billericay Union (1848) 18 L.J.Ex. 282 . . . . . . . 6-162
- v . Humphrey (1884) 1 Q.B.D.141; (1881-5] All E.R. Rep. 357: 53 L.J.Q.B. 47(5. Cana Construction Co. Ltd. v. Queen, The (1973) 37 D.L.R (3d) 418, Canada
51 L.T. 529; 49 J.P. 4; 32 W.R. 944, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '. 1·252
Supreme Ct. . . . . . . . . . . . 7-091
 !vi TABLE OF CASES TABLE OF CASES lvii
Canada Foundry Co. Ltd. v. Edmonton Portland Cement Co. [1918] 3 W.W.R. 886; Centrovincial Estates v. Merchant Investors Assurance Co. [1983} Com. L.R 158,
43 D.L.R. 583 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·163 S.167 C.A. . . . . ......... 1·114
Canada Steamship Lines v. R. [1952] A.C.192; [1952] 1 T.L.R.261;96 S.J. 72; [1952] ' Cervidone Construction Corp. v. U.S. (1991) 931 F. 2d. 860 (Fed. Cir. 1991) . . . . 8·201
_1 All E.R. ~05; [1952] 1 Lloyd's Rep............. 15·015, 15·044, 15·051, 15-059 Ceylon (Government of) v. Chandris [1963] 2 Q.B. 327; [1963] 2 W.L.R. 1097; 107
Canadian Indemmty v. Walkem Machinery [1975] 53 D.L.R. (3d) 1 . . . . . . . . . . 15·010 S.J. 316; [1963] 2 All E.R. 1; [1963) 1 Lloyd's Rep. 214 . . . . . . . . . 18·137
Canadian National Railway v. Norsk Pacific Steamship [1992] 1 S.C.R. 1021; 91 Chabot v. Davies [1936} 3 All E.R. 221. . . . . .......... 2-275, 2·278
D.L.R. (4th) 289 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·359 Chambers, exparte, re. Edwards (1873) L.R. 8 Ch. 289;42 LJ.Ch. 37; 28 L.T.(N.s.)
Candler v. London and Lancashire Guarantee and Accident Co. of Canada (1963) 325; 21 W.R. 349 . . . . . . . 16·028
40 D.L.R. (2d) 408 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15·010 - v. Goldthorpe [1901) 1 K.B. 624; 70 L.J.K.B. 482; 84 L.T. 444;49 W.R. 401; 17
Candle wood Navigation Corp. Ltd. v. Mitsui OSK Lines Ltd. [1986] A.C.1; [1985] 3 T.L.R. 304..... , . . . . . . . . 2·089, 2-216, 2-218, 2·219, 6-184, 18-067
W.L.R. 381; [1985] 2All E.R. 935; (1985) 129 S.J. 506; [1985] 2 Lloyd's Rep. Chandlerv. Webster [1904] 1 K.B. 493; 73 L.J.K.B. 401; 90L.T. 217;52 W.R. 290;20
303; (1985) 82 L.S.Gaz. 2912; (1985) 135 New L.J. 677, P.C. .. .. . 1·322 T.L.R. 222; 48 S.J. 245, C.A.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·271, 4·240, 4·272
Canterbury Pipe Lines v. Christchurch Drainage Board [1979] 2 N.Z.L R. Chandler Bros. v. Boswell [1936] 3 All E.R. 179. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-101, 13-102
347. . . . . . . . . 4·223, 6 096, 6 114, 6119, 6-134, 6142, 6·144, 6·145, 6 149, 6·190, Chandris v. lsbrandsten-Moller Co. Inc. [1951] 1 K.B. 240; 66 T.L.R. (Pt. 2) 358; 94
12·024, 12·050, 12·081 S.J. 534; [1950} 2 All E.R. 618; 84 Ll.L. Rep. 347; reversing in part66 T.L.R.
Canty v. Clarke (1879) 44 U.C. Q.B. 222. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-036, 6·039, 6,176 (Pt. 1) 971; 94 SJ. 303; [1950] 1 All E.R. 768; 38 Ll.L. Rep. 385. . . . 18·012, 18·092
Caparo Industries plc. v. Dickman & others [1990} 2A.C. 605; [1990] 2 W.L.R. 358; Channel Tunnel Group and France Manche S.A. v. Balfour Beatty Construction
[1990) 1 All E.R. 568; (1990) 134 S.J. 494; [1990] BCC 164; [1990] BCLC 273; [1992] 1 Q.B. 656; [1992] 2 W.L.R. 741; [1992] 2 All E.R. 609; (1992) 136S.J.
[1990] E.C.C. 313; [1990] L.S.Gaz. March 28, 42; (1990) 140 New L.J. 248, (L.B.) 54; 56 B.L.R. 23; [1992] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 7; (1992) 8 Const. L.J. 150;
H.L.; reversing [1989] Q.B. 653; [1989] 2 W.L.R. 316; (1989) 133 S.J. 221; [1992] NPC 7; The Times, January 23, 1992; Financial Times, January 29,
[1989] 1 All E.R. 798; (1989) 5 BCC 105; [1989] BCLC 154; 1989 PCC 125 1992, C.A..................... 4·305, 18·016, 18·047, 18·082, 18·093, 18·198
C.A., reversing in part. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·282 1-288 1·306 Chaplin v. Hicks [1911} 2 K.B. 786 8·198
Capital Electric Company v. U.S. 729 F. (2d) 743 (1984) . . . . ' '8·186 Chapman v. Edinburgh Prison Board (1844) 6 a. ofSess. Cas. (2nd Ser.) D.1288 6-036
Capital Motors Ltd. v. Beecham [1975] 1 N.Z.L.R. 576 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·154 - v. Walton (1833) 10 Bing. 57; 3M. & S. 389; 2 LJ.C.P. 213; 38 R.R. 396 . . . 2·086
Cardinal Construction v. City of Brockville [1984] 4 C.L.R. 149. . . . . . . . . 1·306A, 4·052 Chanthall Investments Ltd. v. F.G. Minter Ltd. (1976) 1976 S.C. 73 . . . . 10-004
Carew's Estate Re (1858) 26 Beav.187; 28 L.J.Ch. 218; 4Jur.1290; 32 L.T.( o.s.) 154; Charon (Finchley) v. Singer Sewing Machine (1968) 112 S.J. 536; 207 E.G.
7 W.R. 81; 122 R.R. 76. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3·080 140.............................. . ... 4-051, 4·179, 7·030
Carl Zeiss Stiftung v. Rayner & Keeler Ltd.; Rayner & Keeler v. Courts [1967] 1 Charrington v. Laing (1830) 3M. & P. 587; 6 Bing 242; 8 L.J.(o.s.) CP 50 . . . . . . 10-008
A.C. 853 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-250 Chatbrown v. Alfred McAlpine Construction (Southern) (1987) 3 Const. L.J. 104;
Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. [1893] 1 Q.B. 256; 62L.J.Q.B. 257;67LT. 837;41 (1988) 11 Con. L.R. 1, C.A.; affirming (1987) 7 Con. L.R. 131 . . . . . . . . . 6·199
. W.R. 210; 57 J.P. 325; 4 R. 176; 9 T.LR. 124. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·019, 1·083 Cheeseman v. Bowaters United Kingdom Paper Mills Ltd. [1971] 1 W.L.R. 1773;
Carlisle Place Investments Ltd. v. Wimpey Construction (U.K.) (1980) 15 Build. 115,S.J. 931; [1971] 3 All E.R. 513, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·185
L.R.109 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·149, 18·163 Chelmsford District Council v. Evers (T.J.) (1984) 25 Build. L.R. 99; (1984) 1 Const.
Carlton Contractors v. Bexley Corporation (1962) 106 S.J. 391; 60 L.G.R. L.J. 65....... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 2·083, 2·108
331. ..... : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·110, 1·121, 2·066, 3-052, 7·005 Chermar Productions Pty. Ltd. v. Prestest Pty. Ltd. [1989] 7 BCL 46; (1991) 7 B &
Carman Construct10n Ltd. v. C.P.R. (1982) 136 D.L.R. (3d) 1983; (1980) 28 OR (2d) C.L. 46; (1992) 8 Const. L.J. 44. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-305, 12·095
232; (1980) 109 D.L.R. (3d) 288; Can. High Ct.. ....... 1·141, 1·167, 1·214, 4·041 Chess (Oscar) v. Williams. See Oscar Chess v. Williams.
Camforth, etc., Co., ex parte, re. Phoenix, etc., Co. (1876) 4 Ch.D. 108; 46 L.J.Ch. Chester Grosvenor Hotels v. Alfred McAlpine Management (1991) 56 BLR 115. . 1·243,
115; 35 L.T. 776; 25 W.R. 187 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16·028 1·245, 3·035
Chevalier v. Thompkins (1915) 48 Quebec L.R.(s.c.) 53 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·104
Carosella v. Ginos [1981} 46 LORA 51. . . . . . . . . 5·060, 8·108, 8·134, 8-141, 8·142, 8·143
Carpenters Estates Ltd. v. Davies [1940] Ch.160; 109L.J.Ch. 92; 162L.T. 76;83 S.J. Chichester Joinery v. John Mowlem 42 Build. LR. 100; 23 Con. L.R. 30, D.C. . . 1·039
Chillingworth v. Esche [1924} 1 Ch. 97; 93 L.J.Ch. 129; [1923] All E.R. Rep. 97; 129
960; 56 T.L.R. 269; [1940] 1 All E.R. 13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-300, 4-302
L.T. 808; 40 T.L.R. 23; 68 S.J. 80, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·057
Carr v. Berriman (J.A.) Pty. [1953] 27 A.L.J. 273 ........... 4·142, 4·144, 4-147, 4·173,
Chin Keow v. Government of Malaysia [1967] 1 W.L.R. 813; 111 S.J. 333, P.C. . . 2·087
4-202, 4·206, 4·213, 7,047, 9·001, 9·003, 9·022, 9·023, 12·017 Chinook Aggregates Ltd. v. District Abbotford [1990] 1 W.W.R. 624. . . . . . . . . 3·053
Carron Co. Ltd. v. Thyssen Edelstahwerke A.G. (H.L.) Oct. 15, 1990 . . . . . . . . 11·051 Chittick and Taylor. Re (1954) 12 W.W.R. 653. . . 1 ·067, 2·064, 7·005, 7·072
Cartledge v. Jopling (E.) & Sons [1963] A.C. 758; [1963} 2 W.L.R. 210; 107 S.J. 73;
Christie v. U.S. 237 U.S. 234 (1915) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·061
[1963] 1 All E.R. 341; [1963} 1 Lloyd's Rep. l; H.L.; affirming [1962] 1 Q.B. Chugach Electric Association v. Northern Corporation 562 (P. (2d) 1053
189; [1961] 3 W.L.R. 838; 105 S.J. 884; [1961] 3 All E.R. 482; [1961] 2 Lloyd's (1977). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·236, 4·237, 4-257
Rep. 61; C.A.; [1961] C.L.Y. 5055 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·285 Church v. Sage (1892) 67 L.T. 800; 9T.L.R.119; 41 W.R. 175;5 R. 140........ 11·047
Cartwright v. Hoogstoel (1911) 105 L.T. 628.................... . . . . . . 1·024 Churchward v. R. (1865) L.R. 1 Q.B. 173; 14 L.T. 57; 6 B. & S. 807; 141 R.R. 623 . 3·060
Carus-Wilson and Green Re. (1886) 18 Q.B.D. 7; 56 L.J.Q.B. 530; 55 LT. 864; 35 Citadel General Assurance Company v. Johns-Mansville Canada Inc. [1983]
W.R. 43; 3 T.L.R. 22. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-065, 6·220, 18-066 1.S.C.R. 513...................... 17-002, 17·005, 17,032, 17·040
Catre Industries Ltd. v. Alberta (1990) 63 D.LR. (4th) 74.......... 1·168, 1·191, 4-052 City Centre Properties v. Hall (Matthew) [1969] 1 W.L.R. 772; 113 SJ. 303; sub
Cattle v. Stockton Waterworks Co. (1875) L.R. 10 Q.B. 453; [1874-80] All E.R. nom. City Centre Properties (I.T.C. Pensions) v. Tersons [1969] 2 All E.R.
Rep. 220; 44L.J.Q.B.139; 33 L.T. 475; 30J.P. Jo. 791............... 1·322

I
1121. ....... 13·051, 18·002, 18·015, 18·113, 18·114, 18·115, 18·122, 18·145, 18·196
Cavalier v. Pope (1906} A.C. 428, 75 LJ.K.B. 609; 95 L.T. 65;22 T.L.R. 648; 50S.J. Clare v. Whittaker (L.) & Sons (London) Ltd. [1976] I.C.R.l . . 1·319
575 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-314, 1·316 Clark v. Gilbert (1863) 26 N.Y. 279 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·256
Ce have N.V. v. Bremer Handelgesellschaft m.b.H; Hansa Nord, The [1976] Q.B. --v. Woor [1965] 1 W.L.R. 650 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·294, 4·295, 8·117, 8·147
44; [1975] 3 W.L.R. 447; 119 S.J. 678; [1975] 3 All E.R. 739, [1975] 2 Lloyd's Clark Contractors Ltd. v. Drewett [1977] 2 N.Z.L.R. 556 1·285
Rep. 445, C.A.; reversing [1974] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 216 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·067 Clark Grave Vault v. U.S. 371 F. (2d) 459 (1967) . 4·237
Cellulose Acetate Silk Co. v. Widnes Foundry (1925) [1933J A.C. 20. . . . . 10{HJ2, 10·014 Clarke v. Murray (1885) 11 Viet. L.R. (Law) 817. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-162, 6·173
Cellulose Products Pty. Ltd. v. Truda (1970) 92 W.N. 561 (N.S.W.) ....... 6-021, 17·016
Cementation Piling Foundations v. Aegon [1991} 1 Lloyd's Rep. 526 ...... ,•.. 15.009A I - v . Spence (1836) 4A. & E.448; 6 N. & M.399; 1 H. & W. 760;5 L.J.K.B.161;43
R.R. 395.............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11·014, 16·053
Central Provident Fund Board v. Ho Bock Kee (t/a Ho Bok Kee General Contract-
or) (1981) 17 Build. L.R. 21, C.A. Singapore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,()43
r - v . Watson (1865) 18 C.B.(N.s) 278; 34 L.J.C.P. 148; 11 L.T. 679; 13 W.R. 345;

I
144 R.R. 491 . . . . . 6°126

!
 --~

lviii TABLE OF CASES TABLE OF CASES lix

Clay v. Crump (A.J.) & Sons Ltd. [1964] 1 Q.B. 533; [1963] 3 W.L.R. 866; [1963] 3 Commonwealth of Australia v. Austin (Australia) (1986) 5, A.C.L.R. 19 4·164
All E.R. 687; 107 S.J. 664; [27 M.L.R. 216; 80 L.Q.R. SJ, C.A.. . .. 1·308, 1·311, - - v. Jennings Construction Ltd. (1985) 4 A.C.L.R. 19, Sup. Ct., Viet.; [1985]
1·317, 1·318, 1·319, 2·188 V.L.R. 586. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·250, 1·251, 18·045, 18·054
Clayton v. McConnell (1888) 15 A.R. 560 (Canada) 4-216 - v. Verwayen (1990) 64 A.LJ.R.540. ......... ... 1·246
- - v. Woodman & Son (Builders) Ltd. [1962] 2 Q.B. 533; [1962] 1 W.L.R. 585; Communale v. Traders & General Insurance 328 P.(2d) 198 (1958) . . . . . . . . . . 1·197
[1962] 2 All E.R. 33; 106 S.J. 242; [78 L.Q.R. 319J, C.A.; reversing [1961] 3 Compagnie Algerienne de Meunerie v. Katana Societa di Navigatione Maritima
W.L.R. 987; [1961} 3 AllE.R. 249; 105 S.J. 889; (24 M.L.R. 797; 78 L.Q.R. S.P.A., The Nizetti [1960] 2 Q.B. 115; [1960] 2 W.L.R. 719; 104 S.J. 327;
107; 111 L.J. 831]; [1961] C.L.Y. 825. Leave to appeal to H.L. dismissed sub [1960] 2 All E.R 55; [1960] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 132; C.A.; affirming [1959] 1 Q.B ..
nom. Woodman & Son (Builders) v. Ware (Charles E.) & Son [1962] 1 527; [1959]2 W.L.R. 366; 103 S.J.178; [1959) 1 All E.R. 272; [1959] 2 Lloyd's
W.L.R. 920 ...... 1·311, 1·312, 1·313, 1·317, 1·318, 1·319, 1·325, 2·138, 2·196, 4·179, Rep. 502; [1959] C.L.Y. 3045. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3·060, 4·252
5·022, 5·024, 5·038, 7·031 Compania Panamena Europea Navigacion v. Leyland (Frederick) & Co. [1947]
Clemence v. Clarke (1880) (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 54....... 2·185, 2·186, 2·229, 6·015, 6·068, A.C. 428; [1947] L.J.R. 716; 176 L.T. 524, H.L.. . ...... 1·188, 4·116, 6-096, 6-097,
6·079, 6·083, 6-092, 6·095, 6·127, 6-168, 6-180, 6·218, 6-226, 18·063 6·113, 6·115, 6·130, 6·132, 6·133, 6·139, 6-143, 6·145, 6·148, 6·149, 6·151
Clemence plc. Re. (1992) 59 BLR 56 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16·003 Company, A Re. (No. 003729 of 1982) [1984] 1 W.L.R. 1090; [1984] 3 All E.R. 78;
Clifford v. Watts (1870) L.R.S.C.P. 577; 40 L.J.C.P. 36; 22 L.T. 717; 18 W.R. (1984) 128 S.J. 580; (1984) 81 L.S.Gaz. 2693 . . . . . . . . . . . . 16-003
925. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·233, 4·245 Compton Pty. Ltd. v. Umpty Pty. Ltd. (88) 7 A.C.L.R. 38, Sup. Ct., NSW... 6·075, 6·095,
Clifford (Frank W.) v. Garth [1956] 1 W.L.R. 570; 100 S.J. 379; [1959] 3 All E.R. 323; 18·055
C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·274 Comyn Ching & Co. (London) Ltd. v. Oriental Tube Co. [1981] Com. L.R. 67;
Clough v. L.N.W.R. (1871) L.R. 7 Ex. 26; 41 L.J.Ex. 17; 25 L.T. 708; 20 W.R. (1981) 17 Build. L.R. 47, C.A......... 1·061, 1.066, 1·142, 13·029, 13·065, 15·039,
189. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·146,4·227 15·041; 15·045, 15·057
Clough Mill Ltd. v.Martin[1985] 1 W.L.R.111; (1984) 128S.J.850; [1984] 3AllE.R. Concorde Construction Co. Ltd. v. Colgan Co. (1984) 29 Build. L.R.120,High Ct. of
982; (1985) 82 L.S.Gaz. 116; [1985] L.M.C.L.Q. 15; C.A.; reversing [1984] 1 Hong Kong . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16-058
W.L.R. 1067; (1984) 128 S.J. 564; [1984] 1 All E.R. 721; (1984) L.S.Gaz. Concrete Construction v. Keidan & Co. 1955 (4) S.A.L.R. 515 . .... 1·061, 13-017, 13·032,
2375. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 ·053, 11·058 13·040
Concrete Developments Ltd. v. Queensland Housing Commission [1961] Qd.R.
Clydebank and District Water Trustees v. Fidelity and Deposit Co. of Maryland
356. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·002, 18.052, 18·054
1916 S.C., H.L. 69; 52 Sc.L.R. 106; 1915, 2 S.L.T. 359. . . . . . . . . . . 17·009, 17·030
Connor v. Belfast Water Commissioners (1871) 5 Ir. L.R.C.L. 55 . . . . . . . . . . . 6·048
Clydebank Engineering and Shipbuilding Co. v. Yzquiderdo Y Castaneda [1905]
Conquer v. Boot [1928] 2 K.B. 336.... . ...... 1·252, 1·253, 1·254
A.C. 6; 74 L.J.P.C. 1; 91 L.T. 666; 21 T.L.R. 58. . . . . . . . . . 10·006, 10·012, 10.056
Consolidated Investment and Contracting Co. v. Saponavia Shipping Co. Virgo,
Codelfa Construction Pty. v. State Rail Authority (1982) 149 C.L.R. 337, High Ct. of The [1978] 1 W.L.R. 986; (1978) 122 S.J. 540; [1978] 3 All E.R. 988; [1978] 2
Australia. . . . . . . . . . . 1·189, 1·194, 1·196, 1·217, 4·169, 4·170, 4-171, 4·233, 4·234, Lloyd's Rep. 167 C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·085
4·237, 4·248, 4-260, 8·043, 8·052, 8·054, 8·055, 8·092, 18·007, 18·012 Constant v. Kincaid (1902) 4 (5th Ser.) Ct. of Sess. Cas. 901. ..... 13·026, 14·025, 14·026,
Cohen v. Roche [1927] 1 K.B.169; 95 L.J.K.B. 945; 136 L.T. 219; 42 T.L.R. 674; 70 14-033
SJ. 942 .................... 3-080 Consultants Group International v. Worman (John) (1987) 9 Can. L.R. 47 . . . . . 2·107
Cohen (George) Sons & Co. v. Docks and Inland Waterways Executive (1950) 84 Consumers' Glass Co. v. Foundation Co. (1985) 20 D.L.R. (4th) 126. . 1·373, 2·084, 4·288
LI.L. Rep. 97; [94 S.J. 300], C.A.; affirming (1949) 83 LI.L. Rep. 22....... 12·113, Contra Glow Heating v. Eastern Health Board (1992) 8 Const. L.J. 56 . . . . . . . . 8·079
1·115, 1·119 Cook v. Ipswich Local Board (1871) L.R. 6 Q.B. 451; 40 L.J.M.C.169; 24 L.T. 579; 19
Coker v. Young (1860) 2 F. & F. 98; 121 R.R. 771. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·153, 8.017 W.R.1079 . . . .. 6-170
Colbart v. Kumar (1993) 9 Const. L.J. 7; (1992) 8 Const. L.J. 268; [1992] N.P.C. 32; 59 - v . Wright (1861) 1 B. & S. 559;30L.J.Q.B. 32;4 L.T. 704;7 Jur.(N.s.) 1121; 121
Build. L.R. 89. . . . . . . 1·219, 2·078, 2·170, 5·059, 6·003, 6·090, 6·185 E.R. 822 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 ·079
Coleman v. Gittens (1884) 1 T.L.R. 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,155 Cooke v. Rowe (1950) N.Z.L.R. 410. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.085, S.126
Colin v. De Guisti (1975] 4 S.A.L.R. 223 South Africa . . . . . . 4-091 Coombe v. Green (1843) 11 M. & W. 480; 12 L.J.Ex. 291;2D.P.C.(N.s) 1023; 63 R.R.
College Point Boat Corporation v. U.S. 12 (1925). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12·015, 12·016 661 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·197
Collen v. Wright (1857) 8 E. & B. 647; 27 L.J .Q.B. 215; 4Jur. 357; 30 L.T.( o.s.) 130; 6 Coombs v. Beede 89 Me. 187; 36 A. 104 (1896), Sup. Ct., Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·088
W.R. 123; 110 R.R. 602. . ...... 2·080, 2-082 Cooperv. Langdon (1841) 9M. & W. 60; 11 L.J.Ex. 222; 1 D.P.C.(N.s.) 392; 60 R.R.
Collett v. Morrison (1851) 9 Hare 162; 21 L.J.Ch. 878; 68 E.R. 458. . . . . . . . . . . 1·115 671; affirmed (1842) 10 M. & W. 785 Ex. Ch........................ 2-061
Collier v. Mason (1858) 25 Beav. 200............ 6-096, 6·150 --v. Micklefield Coal & Lime Co. (1912) 107 L.T. 457; 56 S.J. 706 . 14-008
Collinge v. Heywood (1839) 2 A. & E. 633 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·265, 4·289 - v . Phibbs (1867) L.R. 2 H.L.149; 16 L.T. 678; 15 W.R.1049,H.L..... . . . . 1·145
Collins v. Collins (1858) 26 Beav. 306; 28 L.J.Ch. 184; 5 Jur. 30; 32 L.T.(o.s.) 233; 7 - - v Uttoxeter Burial Board (1865) 1 H. & M. 680; 11 L.T. 565; 136 R.R. 292. . . 5·010,
W.R. 115; 122 R.R. 127. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·061, 18·065, 18·066 6· 187, 12·051
Collins Bay Co. v. New York and Ottawa Ry. (1902) 32 Can. S.C.R. 216 . . . . . . 4·026 Cope v. Rowlands (1836) 2 M. & W. 149 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·274
Colonial Metals v. U.S. 494 F. (2nd.) 1353 (1974). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12·015 Coppee Lavalin SA/NV v. Ken-Ren Chemicals and Fertilizers (1994), H.L. May 5,
Columbus Co. v. Clowes [1903] 1 K.B. 244, 72 L.J.K.B. 330 ......... 2· 111, 2·126, 2·159 1994 . . . . . . . . . .... 18·082A
Comdel Commodities v. Siporex Trade S.A. (No. 2) [1991] 1 A.C. 148; (1990] 3 Corben v. Hayes (Unrep.) April27, 1964, Full Court of New South Wales....... 4·077,
W.L.R. 1; [1990} 2 All E.R. 552; (1990) 134 S.J. 1124; [1990] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 4·089
207; (1990) 140 New L.J. 890, H.L.; affirming [1990] 1 AllE.R. 216; [1989] 2 Cork Corporation v. Rooney (1881) 7 L.R. Ir. 191 .... 12.087
Lloyd's Rep. 13; The Times, April 3, 1989 C.A.; affirming in part [1988] 2 Cornwall v. Henson [1900] 2 Ch. 298; 69 L.J.Ch. 581; 82 L.T. 735; 49 W.R. 42 ... 4·221
Lloyd's Rep. 590 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·057 Corus-Wilson and Greene, Re. (1886) 18 Q.B.D. 7; 56 L.J.Q.B. 530; 55 L.T. 846;35
Comet Theatre Enterprises Inc. v. Cartwright 195 F. (2d) 80 (C.A. Ninth Circuit, W.R. 43; 3 T.L.R. 22. . . . . . . 18·062, 18·066
1952) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·276 Cory Bros. & Co. Ltd. v. "The Mecca" [1897] A.C. 286; 66 L.J.P. 86; 76 L.T. 579;45
Comiat v. S.A. Transport Services [1991] (4) S.A. 217, A.O .............. 8·061, 8·062 W.R.667.. ····· 7·119
Commercial Bank ofTasmania v. Jones {1893] A.C313; 62L.J.P.C. 104; 68 L.T. 776; Cory (William) & Son v. Wingate Investments (London Colney); J. H. Coomes &
57 J.P. 644; I.R. 367; 9 T.L.R. 466 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17·079 Partners, Third Party (1980) 17 Build. L.R. 104 C.A.; (1978) 248 E.G.
Commissioner for Main Roads v. Reed and Stuart Rly. Ltd. (1974) 48 A.L.J .R....641; 687. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5·061, 8·133, 8·149
(1974) 12 Build. L.R. 55, High Ct., Australia. 3·016, 4·202, 7.017/7·048, 7·202, Costain International v. Att.-Gen. [1983] Build. L.R. 48, The Hong Kong C.A..... 6-153,
8·006, 8·024 6·210, 6·212, 6·213, 7.001
 Ix TABLE OF CASES
TABLE OF CASES ]xi
Cottage Club Estates v. Woodside EStates Co. (Amersham) [1928] 2 K.B. 463; 97
Cunningham Brothers v. City of Waterloo 117 N.W. (2d) 46 (1962) . . . . 8·218
L.J.K.B. 72; 139 L.T. 353; 33 Can. Cas. 97; 44 T.L.R. 20. . . . 14·017, 14·038, 18·125
Cunningham-Reid v. Buchanan-Jardine [1988] 1 W.L.R. 678; [1988] 2 All E.R. 438;
Cotton v. Wallis [1955] 1 W.L.R. 1168; 99 S.J. 779; (1955] 3 All E.R. 373 .... 2·095, 2-199.
[1988} L.S.Gaz. May 4, 33 C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·103
4·127 Curran v. Northern Ireland Co-ownership Housing Association Ltd. [1987] A.C.
Coulthart v. Clementson (1879) 5 Q.B.O. 42; 49 L.J.Q.B. 204; 41 L.T. 798; 28 W.R.
355 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·030 718; [1987] 2 W.L.R.1043; [1987]2AIIE.R.13; {1987) 131 S.J. 506; {1987) 19
Council of the Shire of Sutherland v. Heyman (1985) 157 C.L.R. 424 . . . . . . . . . 1·277 H.L.R. 318; (1987) 38 Build. L.R. 1; (1987) 84L.S.Gaz.1574; H.L; reversing
County & District Properties v. Jenner (C.) & Sons (1976] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 728; [1986] 8 N.I.J.B. 1, C.A.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·282, 1·288, 1·354
(1974) 3 Build. L.R. 38; (1974) 230 E.G. 1589, D.C.......... ~-234, 1·364, 4·289, Currie v. Misa (1875) L.R. 10 Ex. 153; 44 L.J.Ex. 94; 23 W.R. 450, Ex. Ch.;affinned
18·018, 18·106 sub nom. Misa v. Currie (1876) 1 App. Cas. 544; [1874-80] All E.R. Rep. 686;
County Personnel (Employment Agency) v. Pulver(Alan R.) 9 Co. [1987] 1 W.L.R. 45 LJ.Q.B. 852;35 L.T. 414;24 W.R. 1049, H.L. .... 1·066
916; (1987) 131 S.J. 474; [1987] 1 AllE.R. 289; [1986] 2E.G.L.R. 246; (1987) Curtis v. Chemical Cleaning and Dyeing Co. [1951] 1 K.B. 805; [1951] 1 All E.R 631;
84 L.S.Gaz. 1409; (1986) New L.J. 1138; C.A............... 2·205, 2·209, 2·213 [1951] 1 T.LR. 452; 95 SJ. 253; [212L.T. 60; 67 L.Q.R.153], C.A. . . . . . . 1·171
Courtnay v. Waterford & Central Ireland Rly. Co. (1878) 4 L.R. Ir. 11. .... 4·232, 9·008, Curtis (D.H.) (Builders),Re [1978] Ch.162; [1978] 2 W.L.R.28; (1977) 121 S.J. 707;
9.010, 10·028 [1978] 2 All E.R. 183. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16·014, 16·015
Courtney &Fairbairn v. TolainiBrothers (Hotels) Ltd. [1975] 1 W.L.R. 297; (1974) Cushla Re. [1979] 3 All E.R. 415; [1979] S.T.C. 615 . . . . . . . . . . . . 15·015
119 S.J.134; [1975] 1 AIIE.R. 716. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·044, 1·050, 1·051, 1·054 Cutler v. Close {1832) S.C. & P. 337 38 R.R. 824... . . . . . . . . 4.015, 8·118
Cowell v. Rosehill Race Course. (1937) 56 C.L.R. 605; [1937] A.L.R. Cutter v. Powell (1795) 2 Sm L. C 1; 6 T.R. 320; 3 R.R. 185. . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·006, 4·008
273 ..... : . : ...... : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12·001, 12·088, 12·089, 12·095, 12·097 Cutts v. Head [1984] Ch. 290; [1984] 1 All E.R. 597; (1984) 128 S.J. 117; (1984) 81
Crabb v. Arun D1stnct Council [1976] Ch. 179; [1975] 3 W.L.R. 847; [1975] 3 All L.S.Gaz. 509 C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18· 188
E.R. 865; 119 S.J. 711; (1975) 32 P. & C.R. 70, C.A ............... 1·256, 1·257 Czarnikow v. Koufos. See Kaufos v. Czamikow.
Craig v. East Coast Bays City Council (1986] 1 N.Z.LR. 99. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·282, 1·351 Czamikow & Co. Ltd. v. Roth Schmidt & Co. Ltd. [1922] 2 K.B. 478; 92 L.J.K.B. 81;
Crane v. Hegeman-Harris Co. 4 All E.R. 68; [1939] 83 S.J. 797,. C.A.; affirming 38 T.L.R. 797127 L.T. 824; 28 Can. Cas. 29 C.A.. . . . . . . . 1·165, 6·106, 18·005
[193?] 1 All E.R. 662. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·110, 1·111, 1·118, 8·075, 18·099, 18·100
Craven-Ellis v. Canons Ltd. [1936] 2 K.B. 403; [1936] 2 AllE.R.1066; 105 LJ.K.B.
. 767; 155 L.T. 376; 52 T.L.R. 657; 80 S.J. 652, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·266, 1·270 D. & C. Builders Ltd. v. Rees [1966] 2 Q.B. 617; [1966] 2 W.L.R. 288; [1965] 3 All
Creighton v. Law Car and General Insurance Corporation, Re [1910] 2 K.B. 738 . 18·159B E.R. 837; 109 S.J. 971, C.A.............. 1·072, 1.075, 1·077, 1·197, 4-232, 7·025
Cremdean Properties v. Nash (1977) 244 E.G. 547, C.A.; affirming (1977) 241 E.G. D. & F. Estates v. Church Commissioners for England [1989] A.C. 177; [1988]
837 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·177 3 W.L.R. 368; [1988] 2 All E.R. 992; (1988) 132 S.J. 1092; (1988) 41 BLR 1;
Crestarv. Carr(1987) 131 S.J.1154; [1987] 2F.T.L.R.135; (1987)37Build.L.R.113; (1988) 138 New L.J. 210; [1988] L.S.Gaz. September 14, 46, H.L.; affirming
(1987) 3 Const. L.R. 286; (1987) 84 L.S.Gaz. 1966 C.A ........ 5·013, 5,016, 5·045, [1987] 1 F.T.L.R. 405; (1987) Const. LJ.110; (1987) 36 Build. L.R. 72; (1988)
5·055, 6-004, 6·035, 6·046, 6·058, 6·061, 6·062, 6-077, 6-091 6·155 6,165 11 Con. L.R. 12, C.A.; affirming in part (1987) 7 Con. LR. 40. . . . . . l·274, 1·277,
Crisci v. Security Insurance 426 P. (2d) 173 (1967) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' '1·197 1·292, 1·309, 1·321, 1·352, 1·353, 1·354, 1·355, 1·356, 1·357, 1·358,
Crittall Manufacturing Co. v. London County Council (1910) 75 J.P. 203. 13·016, 1·359, 1·361, 1·363, 1·364, 1·389, 2·152, 13·044, 14·002A
, 13·035, 13.036, 13·039, 13·089 Dabous v. Zuliani {1976) 68 D.L.R. (3d) 415. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,057, 6-046, 6.057
Croft Construction Co. v. Terminal Construction Co. (1959) 20 D.L.R. 247. . . . . . 6·042, Dalgety Ltd. v. Morton [1987] 1 N.Z.L.R. 411 . . 1·076
13·102 Dallman v. King (1837) 4 Bing. N.C. 105; 5 Scott 382; 7 LJ.C.P. 6; 3 Hodges283;44
Crofter Hand-Woven Harris Tweed Co. v. Veitch [1942] A.C. 435; 1942S.C (H.L.) R.R. 661. . . . . . . 6·021, 6·022, 6·023, 6-024, 6·035, 6·037
1; 111 L.J.P.C. 17; 166 L.T. 173; 58 T.L.R. 125; [1942] 1 All E.R. 142. . . . . 3·080 Dalmia Dairy Industries v. National Bank of Pakistan [1977] 121 S.J.. 442; [1978]
Crook v. Seaford, Corporation of (1870) L.R. 109 Eq. 678, L.R. 6 Ch. 551; 25 L.T. 1; 2-Lloyd's Rep. 223. . . . . . . ..... 18·006, 18·007
18 W.R. 1147; 19 W.R. 938 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.304 Dalton v. Angus (1881) 6 App. Cas. 740. . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... 1·343
- v . U.S. 270U.S. 4 {1926) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·189 4·156 Damond Lock Grabowski v. Laing Investments (Bracknell) (1992) 60
Crosby (J.) & Sons Ltd. v. Portland Urban District Council (1967) 5 Build. L.R. ' BLR 112. 18·145, 18·150, 18·151, 18·153, 18·154, 18·159, 18·159E, 18·160
D.C.......... 4·134, 5·019, 7·078, 7·022, 7·118, 8·205, 8·206, 8·207, 8·208, 18·159C Darkin (H.) & Co. Ltd. v. Lee [1916] 1 K.B. 566; 84 L.J.K.B 2031; 133 L.T. 903; 59
Cross v. Leeds Corporation (1902) (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 339 ..... 2·089, 6·103, 6·136, 6·222, S.J. 650. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·013, 4·014, 4-016, 4·019, 4·020, 4·021, 4·022
6·223 Darley Main Colliery v. Mitchell (1886) 11 App. Cas. 127. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·343
Cross (K.) (Doncaster) Ltd. v. Yorkshire (East Riding) County Council (1966) Darlington B.C. v. Wiltshier Northern Ltd. C.A. 1994. . . . . . . 8·142, 8·155B, 8·226, 8·229,
October 12, 1966 (Unrep.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·193 13·073 14·029, 14·030, 14·031, 14·032
Croudace Construction v. Cawoods Concrete Products [1978] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 55; ' Dartford (Guardians of) v. Trickett (1889) 59 L.T. 754; 53 J.P. 277; 5 T.L.R. 619 . 3·066
[1978] 8 Build. L.R. 20, C.A.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·214 Daun v. City of London Brewery Co. (1869) L.R. 8 Eq. 155; 38 L.J.Ch. 454; 20 L.T.
Croudace Ltd. v. Lambeth London Borough Council (1986) 33 Build. L.R. 25; 601; 33 J.P. 547; 17 W.R. 663. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·201
(1986), The Times, 31 March, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·188 4-198 6·120 Davidson v. Claffey Construction (1958) 60 W.A.L.R. 29. . . . . . . 11·006, 11·020, 11·024,
The Crown v. Henrickson & Knutson (1911) 13 C.L.R. 473 . . . . . . . . . . . . '. . . '4·171 11·029, 11·031, 11·035, 11·037, 11·046
Crawshaw v. Pritchard (1899) 16 T.L.R. 45. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·018 1·022 Davidson & Jones v. County of New Hanover, 255 S.E. (2d) 580 (1979), North
Croydon Commercial Gas Co. v. Dickinson (1876) 2 C.P.D. 46; 46 L.J.C.P. 157; 36 ' Carolina . . .. ............ 1·305
L.T. 135; 25 W.R. 157 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17·042 Davies v. London and Provincial Marine Insurance Co. (1878) 8 Ch.D. 469; 38 L.T.
Crump v. Torfaen Borough Council (1982) 19 Build. L.R. 84 [1981] L.S.Gaz. 1144 1·348 478; 26 W.R. 794; sub nom. London & Provincial Marine Insurance Co. v.
Crux v. Aldred {1866) 14 W.R. 656 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,009 Davies; Davies v. London & Provincial Marine Insurance Co. 47 L.J.Ch.
Cullen v. Thompson's Trustees (1862) 4 Macq. (H.L.Sc.) 424 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·232 511........ . . . . . . . . 1·145, 1·152
Culvert v. London Dock Co. (1838) 7 L.J.Ch. 90; 2 Keen 638; 2 Jur. 62; 44 R.R. --v. Swansea Corporation (1853) 8 Ex. 808; 22 L.J.Ex. 297; 21 L.T.(o.s.) 143; 91
300. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17·028 17·043 17·045 17·046 R.R. 775; 17 J.P. 649. 12·063, 12·064, 12·066
Cundy v. Lindsay (1878) 3 App. Cas. 459; 38 L.T. 573; 42 J.P. 483; 26 W.R. 406; 14 ' Davies (A.) & Co. (Shopfitters) Ltd. v. Old (William) Ltd. (1969) 67 L.G.R. 395;
Cox C.C. 93 sub nom. Lindsay & Co. v. Cundy 47 LJ.Q.B. 481, H.L.; affirm- (1969) 113 S.J. 262. . . ...... 1·018, 1.035, 2·068, 3·066, 13.018, 13·053
ing (1877) 2 Q.B.D. 96, C.A.; reversing (1876) 1 Q.B.D. 348, D.C. . . . ~ ., . 1·098
Davies, Middleton & Davies v. Cardiff Corporation (1964) 108 SJ. 74; 62 L.G.R.
Cunliffe v. Hampton Wick Local Board (1892) (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 250; 9 T.L~R.
134, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·076
378. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . .... ... . 5·040, 5·046
Davis v. Freethy (1890) 24 Q.B.D. 519; 59 L.J.Q.B. 318 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14·046
lxii TABLE OF CASES
r TABLE OF CASES Ixiii

Davis v. Hedges (1871) L.R. 6 Q.B. 687; 40 L.R.Q.B. 276; 25 L.T. 155; 20 W.R. Dimes v. Grand Junction Canal Co. (1852) 3 H.L. Cas. 759 .... 6-101
60. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·253, 1·254, 5·007, 5-008 Dimmack v.Hallett (1866)2Ch.App. 21;36LJ.Ch.146; 15 L.T.374; 31 J.P.163; 12
- v . Nichols [1814J 2 Chit. (K.B.) 320 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·010 Jur.(N.s.)953;15W.R.933,LTJ.............................. 1·145
Davis & Co. (Wines) Ltd. v. Afa-Minerva (E.M.1.) Ltd. (1973) 9 Build. L.R. 99; Dineen v. Walpole [1969} 1 Lloyd's Rep. 261; (1969)209E.G. 827;119NewL.J. 746,
. [1974]2Lloyd'sRep.27. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·130,1·141,1·214 C.A...... 18·169, 18·178, 18·181, 18·195
Davis Contractors v. Fareham Urban District Council [1956] A.C. 696; [1956] 3 Discount Recards v. Barclays Bank [1975] 1 W.L.R. 315; (1974) 119 S.J.133; [1975]
W.L.R. 37; lOOS.J. 378; [1956] 2All E.R.145; 54L.G.R. 289,H.L.; affinning 1 All E.R 1071; [1975] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 444. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17·056, 17·069
[1955] 1 Q.B. 302; [1955] 2 W.L.R. 388; 99 S.J. 109; [1955] 1 All E.R. 275, District of Logan Lake v. Riutow Industries [1990] 5 W.W.R. 525 . . . . . . . . 1·292
C.A.; [1955J CJ.Y. 271 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3·049, 3·062, 3·063, 3·064, 4·234, 4·235, District of Surrey v. Church (1977) 76 D.L.R. (3d) 72; aff'd. 101 D.L.R. (3d)
4·248, 4·252, 4°254, 4·255, 4·256, 4·257 218. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·276, 1·285, 2·129, 4·093, 4·113
Davison v. Reeves ((1892) 8 T.L.R. 391 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14·072 Dixon v. Hatfield (1823) 2 Bing. 439; 10 Moo. C.P. 42; 3 L.J.C.P. 59; 27 R.R. 686 . 17·017
Davstone Estate's Lease, Re, Manprop v. O'Dell {1969] 2 Ch. 378; [1969] 2 W.L.R. - - v. South Australian Railway Commissioners (1923) 34 C.L.R. 71. . . . . 6°131, 6·137,
1287; 113 S.J. 366; [1969] 2 All E.R. 849; 20 P. & C.R. 395 ..... 6·017, 6·096, 6·149 6·144, 6·168
Davy Offshore v. Emerald Field Contracting (1991) 55 BLR 1; [1992] 2 Lloyd's Dobson and Sutton v. Groves (1844) 6 A. & E.(N.s.) 637 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·137
Rep. 142; Financial Times, March 18, 1992, C.A.; affirming Financial Times, Docker v. Hyams [1969) 1 W.L.R.1060; 113 S.J. 381; [1969] 3 AllE.R. 808; [1969] 1
January 28, 1992. (1991) 55 BLR 1. . . . . . . . . ... 1·190, 2·201, 4·095, 11 ·041 Lloyd's Rep. 487, C.A.; affirming [1969] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 333. Petition for
Davys v. Buswell [1913] 2 K.B. 47;82 L.J.K.B. 499; 108 L.T. 244 . . . . . . . . . . . . 17·017 leave to appeal to House of Lords refused. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·026, 6-075
Dawber Williamson Roofing v. Humberside County Council (1979) 14 Build. L.R. Dodd v. Churton [1867] 1 Q.B. 562; 66 L.J.Q.B. 477; 76 L.T. 438; 45 W.R. 490; 13
70; October 22, 1979, D.C.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11·017, 11·030 T.L.R. 305; 41 S.J. 383....... 6·114, 10·025, 10.032, 10·035, 10·040, 10·064, 10·074
Dawdy and Hartcup, Re (1885) 15 Q.B.D. 426; 54 L.J.Q.B. 574; 53 L.T. 800 . . . . 18·061 Dodd Properties (Kent) v. Canterbury City Council [1980] 1 W.L.R. 433; (1979) 124
Dawnays v. Minter (F. G.) and Trollope and Colls [1971] 1 W.L.R. 1205; [1971] 2 SJ.84; [1980] 1 All E.R. 928;(1979) 253 E.G.1335; (1979) 13 BuildL.R.45,
Lloyd's Rep. 192; sub nom. Dawnays v. Minter (F. G.), 115 S.J. 434; [1971 J2 C.A.; reversing [1979] 2 All E.R. 118; (1978) 248 E.G. 229, D.C...... 2·205, 2·207,
All E.R. 1389; C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5·011, 6·004, 6·195, 10·075 2·209, 5·061, 8·132, 8·142, 8·146, 8·149
Day v. Mel.ea (1899) 22 Q.B.D. 610; 58 LJ.Q.B. 293; 60 LT. 947; 53 J.P. 532; 37 Dods v. Coopers Creek Vineyards & Co. [1987] 1 N.Z.LR. 530, Auckland High Ct. 8·093
W.R. 483; 5 T.L.R. 379, C.A.. . . . .......... 1.074, 1·076, 1·078 Doe v. Essex, Goodman & Suggitt (1985) 32 B.L.R 140. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·207
- v . Ost [1973J 2 N.Z.L.R. 385. . . . . . . . 1·130, 1·284, 1·291, 2·166, 13·110 Doe (Reverend E.G.) v. Canadian Surety Co. [1937] S.C.R. 1. . . . . . . . . 17·026, 17·035,
17·037, 17·043, 17·044
-v.U.S.245U.S.159(1917) . . . . . . . . . . . . . '. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·061
DeMorgan,Snell&Co. v. RiodeJaneiroF1ourMills,(1892) (4th ed.) Vol.2,p. 185; Doleman v. OssettCorporation [1912] 3K.B.257;81 L.J.K.B.1092; 107L.T. 581; 10
L.G.R. 915; 76 J.P. 457. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·002, 18·068
8 T.L.R. 108, 292. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-029, 6-033, 6·172
Dean v. Ainley [1987] 1 W.L.R. 1729; (1987) 131 S.J. 1589; [1987] 3 All E.R. 784; Dominion Chain v. Eastern Construction Ltd. (1976) 68 D.L.R. (3d) 385. . . . 1·373, 1 ·382
Donkin and Leeds Canal Co., Re (1893) (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 239. . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·131
(1987) 284 E.G. 1244; (1987) 84 L.S.Gaz. 2450, C.A.......... 8·135, 8·136, 8·142
Donnelly v. Joyce [1974] Q.B. 454; [1973) 3 W.L.R. 514; 117 S.J. 488; [1973] 3 All
Debenham v. King's College, Cambridge (1884) 1 T.L.R. 170 (1984) 1 Cab. & El.
E.R. 475; [1973] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 130, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·226
438 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·245, 2·257, 2·266 Donnelly Const. v. Oberg P. (2d) 1292 (1984), Sup. Ct., Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·295
Degagne v. Chave (1896) 2 Terr. L.R. 210, Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·175
Donoghue v. Stevenson [1932] A.C. 562; [1932] All E.R. Rep. 1; 101 L.J.P.C. 119;
Deglan v. Guaranty Trust Company of Canada and Constantineau 1954S.C.R. 725; 147 L.T. 281;48T.L.R. 494; 76 S.J. 396; 37 Com. Cas. 350; [1932] S.L.T. 317;
[1954) 3 D.L.R. 785 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·270 [1932] S.C. (H.L.) 31. ....... 1·128, 1·274, 1·279, 1·307, 1·308, 1·309, 1·322, 1·327,
Demers v. Dufresne Engineering [1979] S.C.R. 146. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·297, 2·192, 4·056 ' 1·329, 1·337, 1·351, 1·355, 1·356, 1·358, 1·360, 1·364,
Dempster (R. & J.) Ltd. v. Motherwell Bridge and Engineering Co.1964 S.L.T. 353; 1 ·369, 2·083, 2·084, 2· 152, 13·042
. affirming 1964 S.C. 308; 1964 S.L.T. 113. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·043, 1·048, 1·056 Dorset County Council v. Southern Felt Roofing Co. 48 BLR 96; (1990) 6 Const.
Denms& Co. v.Munn [1949]2K.B.327; [1949] L.J.R.857;65T.L.R.251;93S.J.181; L.J. 37; (1990) 10 Tr. L.R. 96, C.A.; affirming 26 Con. L.R. 128.... 15·002, 15·020,
[1949] 1 All E.R. 616; C.A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·274, 4·277 15·026, 15·039
Denny Mott& Dickson v. James B. Fraser & Co. [1944] A.C. 265; 113 L.J.P.C. 37; Dove v. Banhams Patent Locks Ltd. [1983) 1 W.L.R. 1436; [1983) 2 All E.R. 833;
171 LT. 345; 60 T.L.R. 419; 88 S.J. 203. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·236 (1983) 127 S.J. 748; (1983) 133 New LJ. 538 ...... . 1·351
Department of the Environment v. Thomas Bates & Son Ltd. [1991] 1 A.C. 499; Downe (Lord) v. John Dye & Son Ltd., 1972 S.L.T. 30, Sh.Ct. 1·078
[1990] 3 W.L.R. 457; [1990] 2 All E.R 943; [1990] 46 E.G. 115; (1990) 134 S.J. Downer Enterprises,Re [1974] 1 W L.R.1460; 118 SJ. 829; [1974] 2 All E.R.1074 16-007
1077; 50 Build. L.R. 61; 21 Con. L.R. 54; H._L; affirming [1989] 1 All E.R. Doyle v. Olby (Ironmongers) Ltd. [1969] 2 Q.B. 158; [1969] 2 W.L.R. 673; [1969] 2
1075; [1989] 26 E.G. 121; 13 Con. L.R. 1; 44 Build. L.R. 88; (1989) 139 New All E.R. 119; 113 S.J. 128; [32 M.L.R. 556], C.A. . . . . . . . . 1·164
L.J. 39, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·352 Doyle Construction Ltd. v. Carling O'Keefe Breweries of Canada (1988) (Unrep.)
Derry v. Peek (1889) 14 App. Cas. 337; 58 L.J.Ch. 864; 61 L.T. 265; 38 W.R. 33; 1 Brit. Columbia Ct. of App. Feb. 1-21988 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-133
Meg. 292; 5 T L.R. 625;54 J.P.148, H.L.; reversing sub nom. Peek v. Derry Drennan v. Star Paving Co. 333 P. 2nd 757 (1958); (1958) 333 D.L.R. (2d) 757 . . 1·027,
(1887) 37 Ch.D. 541, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·162, 1·280 13·107
Design 5 v. Keniston Housing Associations (1986) 38 Build. L.R. 123; (1986) 34 Drew v. Drew (1855) 14Ct. ofSess. Cas. (2nd Ser.) 559;affirmedby H.L., The Times,
Build. L.R. 92. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·226 March 12, 1855 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-128
Devonald v. Rosser & Sons [1906] 2 K.B. 728; [1904--7] All E.R. Rep. 988; 75 - v. Josolyne (1887) 18 Q.B.D. 590; 56 LJ.Q.B. 490; 37 L.T. 5; 35 W.R. 570; 3
L.J.K.B. 688; 95 L.T. 232;22 T.LR. 682; 50S.J. 616, CA. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·201 T.LR. 482. . . . . . . . . . . 2·257, 2·266, 12.031, 14-043, 14·044, 14·050, 16,062, 16·063
Dew (G.) & Co. v. Tarmac Construction (1978) 15 Build. L.R. 22, C.A.. . . 18·093, 18.094 Dreyfus (Louis) et Cie v. Pamaso Cia NavieraS.A. (The Dominator) [1960] 2 Q.B.
Diamond v. McAnnany (1865) 16 U.C.C.P. 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7·071 49; [1960] 2 W.L.R. 637; [1960] 1 All E.R. 759; 104 S.J. 287; [1960] 1 Lloyd's
Dickinson v. Dodds (1876) 2 Ch.D. 463; 45 L.J.Ch. 777; 34 L.T. 607; 40 J.P. 532· 24 Rep.117, C.A.;reversing[1959J 1 Q.B.498; (1959] 2 W.L.R.405; [1959} 1 All
W.R. 594, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '... 1·024 E.R. 502; 103 S.J. 221; [1959} 1 Lloyd'sRep.125; [26 Sol. 97; 22M.L.R. 333];
- - v Iowa State Department of Transport 300 N.W. (2d) 112 (1981) . . . . . . . . 8·218 [1959] C.L.Y. 3039 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·223
Dies v. British and International Mining & Finance Corporation [1939] 1 K.B. Duchess of Argyll v. Beuselinck. See Argyll (Duchess of) v. Beuselinck.
724. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·228, 4·229, 12·022, 12·060 Duckworth v. Alison (1836) 1 M. & W. 412; 2 Gale II; Ty. & Gr. 742; 5 L.J.Ex.171;
Dillingham Construction Pty. v. Downs [1972] 2 N.S.W.L.R. 49.......... l-_135, 1·158, 150 E.R. 494 . . . . . 10·055
1·166, 1·169, 1·284, 1·285, 3·078, 4·142, 4;143, 4·203 Dunaberg and Witapsk Railway Co. Ltd. v. Hopkins Gilkes & Co. Ltd. (1877) 36
Dillon v. Jack (1903) 23 N.Z.L.R. 547 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12·072 L.T. 733. . . . . . . 6·009, 6·050
 !xiv TABLE OF CASES
r TABLE OF CASES lxv
-Dunbar Ltd. v. South African Railways [1943] A.O. 22 ... 6·124 Edward Owen Engineering v. Barclays Bank International [1978] Q.B. 159. . . 17·006,
Duncan v. Blundell (1820) 3 Stark. (N.P.) 6; 5 M. & P. 548.. 4·077, 4-082, 4·089, 17·0110, 17·054, 17·055, 17-060, 17·061, 17·063, 17·067, 17·069, 17·071,
4-101, 4· 103, 4· 124 17·073, 17-076
Duncanson v. Scottish County Investment Co., 1915 S.C. 1106, Ct. of Sess ........ 4-153, Edwards v. Bairstow and Harrison [1956] A.C.14; [1955) 3 W.L.R. 410; 99 S.J. 558;
9·010 [1955] 3 All E.R. 48; [1955] T.R. 209; 48 R. & I.T. 534; 36 T.C. 207; 34 A.T.C.
Dunlop & Ranken v. Hendall Steel Structures. Pitchers (Garnishees) [1957] 1 198; H.L.; reversing [1954] T.R. 155; 47 R & I.T. 340; 33 A.T.C. 131; T.C.
W.L.R. 1102; 101 S.J. 852; [1957] 3 All E.R. 344, D.C.. . . . . . . 6,041, 6·192, 6·193, Leaflet No. 1692; [1954) C.L.X. 1555, C.A.; restoring {1954] T.R. 65;
8· 106, 13.102, 14·066, 14·067 4 R. & I.T. 177; 33 A.T.C. 58; T.C. Leaflet No. 1680. . . . . 18·175, 18·176
Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co. Ltd. v. Selfridge & Co. Ltd. [1915] A.C. 847; [1914-15] ~ v. Skyways Ltd. [1964] 1 W.L.R. 349; [1964) 1 All E.R. 494; 108 S.J. 279 [80
All E.R. Rep. 333; 84 L.J.K.B. 1680; 113 L.T. 386; 31 T.L.R. 399; 59 S.J. L.Q.R 315; 152 Acct. 184]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·043, 1·082
439. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·061, 10·006 Egan v. South Australian Railway Authority (1973) 130 C.LR. 506. 1·218, 6· 131, 6·137
Dunrae Manufacturing Ltd. v. C. L. North & Co. [1988} 2 N.Z.L.R. 602 . 1·076 ~ - v. State Transport Authority (1982) 31 S.A.S.R. 481; (1979) 24 S.A.S.R. 5 .... 8·150,
Durham Brothers v. Robertson [1898] 1 Q.B. 765; 67 L.J.Q.B. 484; 78 L.T. 438... 14·013, 8·151, 8·153, 10·016, 11-026, 11·031, 11·034,
14-014, 14·015, 14·017 11·035, 11·042, 11-044, 11·060, 11·061, 12·013, 12·067, 12·083
Dutton v. Bognar Regis Urban District Council [1972] 1 Q.B. 373; [1972] 2 W.L.R. Electronic Industries v. Jones (David) (1954) 91 C.L.R. 288. . . . . . . . 9·008, 9,011, 9·012
299; (1971) 116 S.J. 16; 70 L.G.R. 57, sub nom. Dutton v. Bognar Regis Eliason v. Henshaw (1819) 1 Wheaton 225 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12·043
United Building Co. [1972] 1 All E.R. 462; [1972} 1 Lloyd's Rep. 227, C.A. Ellerine Brothers v. Klinger [1982] 1 W.L.R.1375; (1982) 126 S.J. 592; [1982] 2 All
[35 Conv. 385; [1972) J.P.L. 69; 116 S.J. 264; 136 L.G.Rev. 362); affirming E.R. 737; (1982) 79 L.S.Gaz. 987, C.A..... 18·090
[1971] 2 All E.R. 1003... 1·276, 1-277, 1·314, 1 ·345, 1·346, 1-347, 1·356, 1 ·361, 1·364 Elliott, Re.See South Devon Ry., Ex P.
Dyer v. Build/Lind Partnership [1983] Build. L.R. 23, D.C.. 10·053, 12.(109 Ellis v. Hamlen (1810) 3 Taunt. 52; 12 R.R. 595 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-010
Dyer Ltd. v. Simon Build Partnership (1982) 23 Build. L.R. 23 . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·220 ~ v. Torrington [1920] 1 K.B. 399; 86 L.J.K.B. 369; 122 L.T. 361; 36 T.L.R. 82 . 14·025
Dyer (Thomas) & Co. v. Bishop International Engineering Co. (1968) 303 F. 2nd Ellis-Don v. Parking Authority of Toronto (1978) 28 Build. L.R. 98, Sup. Ct. of
655. 13·111, 13-112, 13·113 Ontario. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3·060, 4·168, 8· 186, 8·188, 8·220
Ellis Mechanical Services v. Wates Construction (1976) 2 Build. L.R. 57; [1978] 1
EDAC v. Moss (1985) 1 C.L.J.131 2·108 Lloyd's Rep. 33, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·091
E.P. Finance Co. v. Dooley [1963] l W.L.R.1313; 107 S.J. 982; [1964] 1 All E.R. 527 10·021 Elmes v. Burgh Market Co. (1891) (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 170 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·153
Eads v. Williams (1854)4 DeG.M. &G. 674;3 Eq. Rep. 244;24L.J. Ch.531;3 W.R. Elphinstone (Lord) v. Monkland Iron Co. (1886) 11 App. Cas. 332 . . . 10·006
98; 1 Jur. 193; 102 R.R. 326. . . 2-186 Eisley v. Collins Insurance Agencies (1978) 83 D.L.R. (3d) 1, Can. Sup. Ct.. . . . . 10·002,
Eagle Star Insurance Company Ltd. v. Gale and Power [1955} J.P.L. 679 . . . 2-206 10,016, 10·022, 10·025, 10·042, 10-093
Emden'v. Carte (1881) 17 Ch. D.169, 768; 19 Ch.D. 311;50L.J. Ch. 492;51 L.J. Ch.
Eaglesham v. McMaster [1920] 2 K.B. 169; 89 L.J.K.B. 805; 123 L.T. 198; 84 J.P.
41; 44 L.T. 344, 636; 29 W.R. 600 . 16·059
146. . . . . . . . 6.040, 6-080, 6-095, 6·226
Empimall HoldingsPty. Ltd. v. Machon PaullPartnersPty. Ltd. (1989) 8 A.C.L.R.
Earl v. Hector Whaling [1961] Lloyd's Rep. 459; (1961) 105 S.J. 321 [24M.L.R. 800;
111 L.J. 835], C.A. . . 1·110 65, C.A., N.S.W. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·036
Empresa Exportadora De Azucar (CUBAZUCAR) v. Industria Azucareva
~ v. Lubbock [1905] 1 K.B. 253; 74 L.J.K.B. 121; 91 L.T. 830; 553 W.R. 145; 21
Nacional S.A. (JANSA); Playa Largo and Marble Islands The [1983) 2
T.L.R. 71; 49 S.J. 83, C.A. 1·314
Lloyd's Rep. 171; [1983] Com. L.R. 58, C.A.; affirming [1982] Com. L.R.
Earl of Mexborough and Wood Re (1883) 47 L.T. 516 . . . . . . 10·010
171 . . . . . . . 18·096
Earle (G. & T.) Ltd. v. Hemsworth Rural District Council (1928) 140 L.T. 69; 44
Emson Contractors v. Protea Estates (1988) 4 Const. L.J. 119. . . . 4· 134, 7·052, 18·057
T.L.R. 758. . . . . . 14·016, 14-041, 14-044
Emson Eastern (In receivership) v. EMEDevelopment55 BLR 114; 26 Con. LR57 . 4·005,
Earth and General Contracts v. Manchester Corporation (1958) 108 L.J. 665..... 4-216,
12-061
11·022, 11·049 Enco Civil Engineering v. Zew International (1991) 56 BLR43 ......... 18-047, 18·093
East Ham Corporation v. Sunley (Bernard) & Son Ltd. [1966] A.C. 406; [1965] 3
English Industrial Estates Corporation v. George Wimpey & Co. Ltd. (1973) 1
W.L.R. 1096; [1965) 3 All E.R. 619; 109 S.J. 874; 64 L.G.R. 43; [1965] 2
Lloyd's Rep. 118, (1972) 116 S.J. 945; (1972) 71 L.G.R. 127, C.A.. 1·005, 1·227,
Lloyd's Rep. 425, H.L.; reversing [1965] 1 W.L.R. 30; [1965] 1 All E.R. 210;
108 S.J. 918; [1964] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 491; 63 L.G.R. 119; [196<tJ C.L.Y. 362, 2·169, 2·175
Enoch and Zaretsky, Bock & Co.'s Arbitration, Re [1910] 1 K.B. 327 .... 18·147
C.A....... 1·009, 1·247, 1·249, 1·300, 1·312, 2· 193, 2·195, 2·197, 2·206, 5·022, 5·024, Entores Ltd. v. Miles Far East Corporation [1955] 2 Q.B. 327; [1955] 3 W.L.R. 48;
5·059, 6·074, 6·083, 6·084, 6·092, 6·093, 6·183, 6·190, 7·031, 8·108, 8·115, [1955] 2All E.R.493; 99 S.J. 384; [1955] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 511; 72 L.Q.R.10; 19
8·117, 8·124, 8·137, 8·139, 8-146, 8·147 M.L.R. 89; 99 S.J. 446; 220 L.T. 36; [1955] C.L.J. 148; 3 S.A.L.J. 77, C.A. . . 1·040
East River Steamship v. Transamerica Delaval Inc. 106 S.Ct. 2295 (1986) . . . . . . 1·322 Equitable Debenture Assets Corp. v. Moss (William) (1984) 1 Const. L.J. 131 . . 4-103
East Suffolk Rivers Catchment Board v. Kent [1941) A.C. 74 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·346 Equitable Securities Ltd. v. Neil [1987] 1 N.Z.L.R. 233, New Zealand 1·076
Eastern Airlines v. Gulf Oil 415 F. Supp. 429 (1979) . . . 4-237 Eriksson v. Whalley [1971] 1 N.S.W.L.R. 397...... 12·033, 12·039, 12·040, 12·043, 12·044
Ebbetts v. Conques [1895] 2 Ch. 377; 82 L.T. 560; 16 T.L.R. 165 . . . . 4-306 Erlangerv. New Sombrero Phosphate Co. (1878) 3 App. Cas.1218;48 L.J. Ch. 73; 39
Ebdy v. McGowan (1870) (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 9 . . . . . 2·272 L. T. 269; 27W.R. 65; H.L. affirming sub nom. New Sombrero Phosphate Co.
Ebsworth & Tidy's Contract Re (1889) 42 Ch.D. 23 . . . . . . . 16·012 v. Erlanger (1877) 5 Ch.D. 73, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·148
Eccles v. Southern (1861) 3 F. & F. 142 . . . . . . . 13-031 Ernst Inc. v. Manhattan Construction, 551 F. (2d) 1026 (1977), 5th circuit. . 1·305
Eckersley v. Mersey Docks and Harbour Board [1894} 2 Q.B. 667;71 L.T. 308; 9 R. Ernst & Whinney v. Willard Engineering (Dagenham) (1987) 3 Const. L.J. 292;
827 . . . . . . 18·131 (1988) 40 B.L.R. 67, Official Referee. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-352, 13·045
Edelman v. Boehm (1964) 26 S.A.S.R. 66, South Australia. . ..... 2·083, 2·108 Errico v. Lotter 1956 (4) S.A. 139. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·044, 6.()45
Edgeworth Construction Ltd. v. F. Lea & Associates [1993] 3 S.C.R. 206 1·168, Esal (Commodities) and Reitan v. Oriental Credit and Wells Fargo Bank N.A.;
1·294, 1·296, 1·296A, 1-2968, 1·304, 1·306A, Banque du Caire S.A.E. v. WellsFargoBankN.A. [1985] 2Lloyd's Rep. 546;
1·3068, 2·107, 4·062, 6-097, 6·228, 7-027 [1986] FLR 70, C.A............ 17·011E, 17·062, 17·064, 17·065, 17-068, 17-071
Edgington v. Fitzmaurice (1885) 29 Ch.D. 459; 55 L.J. Ch. 650; 53 L.T. 369; 50 J.P. Esanda Finance Corporation v. Plessnig (1988) 166 C.L.R. 131, High Ct. of Aus-
52;33W.R.911;1 T.L.R.326;50J.P.52 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . T·' 1·145 tralia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10·018
Edgworth Construction Ltd. v. N. D. Lea and Associates (1991) 53 B.C.L.R. (2d) Eshelby v. Federated European Bank Ltd. [1932] 1, K.B. 254, 423 ........ 4-006, 4·012,
180; (1991) 6 Const. L.J. 328. . . . . . . . . 1·288, 1-296, 1·304
4·021, 4·022, 4·024
 !xvi TABLE OF CASES TABLE OF CASES lxvii
Ess v. Truscott (1837) 2 M. & W. 385; M. & H. 75; 6 LJ:Ex.144; 1 Jur. 358;46 R.R. Felthouse v. Bindley (1862) 11 C.B.(N.s.) 869; 31 L.J.C.P. 204; 6 L.T. 157; 10 W.R.
630 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·172 423; (1863) 1 New Rep. 401; 7 L.T. 835; 11 W.R. 429, Ex.Ch ......... 1·033, 1,034
Essenden and Flemington Corporation v. Ninnis (1879) 5 Viet. L.R. (Law) 236 . . 12-048
Fenton v. Thorley [1903] A.C. 443 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15·070
Esso Petroleum Ltd. v. Customs and Excise Commissioners [1976J 1 W.L.R. 1;
Fercometal Sarl v. MSC Mediterranean Shipping Co. S.A.; Simona, The [1989]
[1976} 1 All E.R.117;(1975) 120S.J.49,H.L.;afjirming[1975J 1 W.L.R.406;
119S.J. 205, C.A.;reversing[l973J 1 W.L.R.1240; 117S.J. 680; [125NewL.J. A.C. 788, H.L. [1988] 3 W.L.R. 200; (1988) 132 S.J. 966; [1988] 2AllE.R. 742;
402] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·083 (1988) 2 Lloyd's Rep. 199; (1988) 138 New L.J. 178 H.L. affirming [1987] 2
Essa Petroleum Co. Ltd. v. Mardon [1976] Q.B. 801; [1976] 2 W.L.R. 583; [1976] 2 FTLR 254· [1987] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 236, C.A. affirming [1986] 1 Lloyd's Rep.
All E.R. 5; 120 S.J. 131; [1976] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 305, C.A.; reversing in part 171 .... :..... ............. 4-226
[1975] Q.B. 819; [1975] 2 W.L.R. 147; (1974) 119 S.J. 81; [1975] 1 All E.R. Ferguson v. Sohl (1992) 62 BLR 94, C.A ............ 1·261, 4·190, 4·228, 4·231A, 8·168
. 203 ..... : .......... 1·134, 1·135, 1·141, 1·145, 1·154, 1·167, 1·214, 1·280, 1·373 Fernbrook Trading Co. Ltd. v. Taggart (1979) [1979] 1 N.Z.L.R. 556..... 10·038, 10·040,
Ettndge v.. Vermm Board of the District of Murat Bay [1928] S.A.S.R. 124, Aus- 10·085, 10-086, 10-088
traha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-027 Ferrara v. National Surety Co. [1917] 1 W.W.R. 719........... 17·029, 17·034, 17.050
Eugenia, The. See Ocean Tramp Tankers Corporation v. v/o Sorfracht. Fibrosa Spolka Akeyjna v. Fairbairn Lawson Combe Barbour [1943) A.C. 32 . . . 4·240
European Assurance Association, Re, Conquest's Case (1875) 1 Ch.D. 334; 45 L.J. Fidelitas Shipping Co. Ltd. v. V/0 Exportchleb [1966] 1 Q.B. 630; [1965} 2 W.L.R.
Ch. 336; 33 L.T. 762. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-023 1059; [1965] 2 All E.R. 4; 109 S.J. 191; [1965] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 223, C.A.; revers-
Euston Contractors Ltd. v. Protea Estates (1987) 39 BLR 126. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·167 ing [1965] 1 Lloyd's Rep.13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·251
Evans v. Balog (1976) 1 N.S.W.L.R. 36. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·108, 8·130, 8·136, 8-141 Fidelity & Casualty of New York v. Jones Construction (1963) 325 F. (2d) 605. 2·097
- v . Carte (1881), (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 78. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·069, 2·160 L. Figuoiredo Navegacas S.A. v. Reederei Richard Schroeder K.G. (The "Ench
Evans, Coler_nan & Evans v. Nelson (R.A.) Construction (1958) 16 D.L.R. (2d) 123 14·046 Schroeder") [1974] 1 Lloyd's Rep.192........... 18·169, 18·178, 18·180, 18·195
Evans Deakms Industries Ltd. v. Queensland Electricity Generating Board (1985) Fillite (Runcorn) v. Aqua-lift ( A firm) 45 BLR 27; 26 Con LR66; (1989) 5 Const. L.J.
4 B.C.L.R. 334 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·033 197, C.A.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·007, 18·009, 18·102
Evans (J.) & Son (Portsmouth) Ltd. v. Merzario (Andrea) Ltd. [1976] 1 W.L.R. Finnegan v. Allen {1943] 1 K.B. 425; 112 L.J.K.B. 323; 168L.T. 316; [1943] 1 All E.R.
1078; {1976] 2 All E.R. 930; 120 S.J. 734; [1976] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 165, C.A.; 493 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·218
reversm~ [1975] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 162............ 1·083, 1·212, 1·213, 1·214, 1·225 Finnegan (J.F.) v. Sheffield City Council 43 BLR 124; (1989) 5 Const. L.J. 54,
Everglade Maritime Inc. v. Schiffahrtsgesellschaft DETLEF Von Appen m.b.H., O.R. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·064, 8· 184, 8·188, 8· 189, 9·041
Maria, The [1993) Q.B. 780. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . lS.187, 18·190 Finnegan (J.) Ltd. v. Ford Sellar Morris Developments Ltd. (1991) 53 BLR
Ex comm v. Bamaodah [1985} 1 Lloyd's Rep. 403; (1985) 82 L.S.Gaz. 761,
38. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·086, 16·058
C.A..... · · . . . . . . . . 18·025, 18-027 Firbank's Executors v. Humphreys (1886) 18 Q.B.D. 54;56L.J.Q.B. 57;56 L.T. 36;
35 W.R. 92; 3 T.L.R. 49 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·080
Fairclough Building Ltd. v. Borough Council of Port Talbot (1992) 62 Build. L.R. Firma C-Trade S.A. v. Newcastle Protection and Indemnity Association; Fanti,
82. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·019, 1·022, 3·053 The; Socony Mobil Oil Inc. v. West of England Shipowners Mutual
Fairclough Building v. Rhuddlan Borough Council (1985) 30 Build. L.R. 26; (1985) Insurance Association; Padre Island, The (No. 2) (1991) 2 A.C. 1; [1990]
2 Const. L.J. 55; [1985] C.I.L.L. 208, C.A.; affirming (1983) 3 Con. L.R. 20, 3 W.L.R. 78; [1990] 2 All E.R. 705; (1990) 134 S.J. 833; [1990] BCLC
_ D.C................... 2·145, 2·170, 2·174, 4·195, 5·033, 7·007, 13,076, 13·082 625· [1990) 2 Lloyd's Rep. 191, H.L.; reversing [1989] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 239,
Farrweather (H.) v. Asden Securities (1979) 12 Build. L.R. 40, D.C........ 5·028, 6·076, c.A.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.113, 15-038
6·085, 6·170, 6·181, 10·071, 10·090, 10·095 Fischback & Moore of Canada and Noranda Mines, Re (1971) 19 D.L.R. (3d)
--v. Wandsworth London Borough Council (1988) 39 B.L.R. 106. . . . . . 2·116, 3·018, 329 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-175, 18·029
4·095, 4· 108, 4· 177, 13·029 Fisherv. C.H.T. Ltd. [1966] 2 Q.B. 475; [1966] 2 W.L.R. 391; [1966] 1 All E.R. 88, 109
Fakes v. Taylor Woodrow Construction [1973] Q.B. 436; [1972) 2 W.L.R. 161; SJ. 933, C.A.; reversing in part [1965) 1 W.L.R.1093; [1965] 2 All E.R. 601;
(1972) 117 S.J. 13; [1973] 1 All E.R. 670. C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·107 109 S.J. 612; [1965] C.L.Y. 3238; [236 L.T. 537] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·329, 1-334
Faraday v. Tamworth Union (1916) 86 L.J. Ch. 436; 81 J.P. 81; 15 L.G.R. - v. Wellfair (P.G.); Fox v. Wellfair (P.G.) (1981) 125 S.J. 413; [1981) 2 Lloyd's
258..... - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·257, 2·266 Rep. 514; [1981] Com. L.R 140, [1982] 19 Build. L.R. 52; [1982] 263 E.G. 589,
Farley v. Housing and Commercial Developments Ltd. (1984) 26 Build. L.R. 66; 657, C.A.; [1979] I.C.R. 834, (1979) 124 S.J. 15, E.A.T.. . . . 18-071, 18·074, 18·132,
(1984) 81 L.S.Gaz. 2216 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-044, 16·019 18·139, 18·148, 18·149, 18·159, 18·161
Farr (A.E.) v. Admiralty [1953] 1 W.L.R. 965; 97 S.J. 491; [1953] 2 All E.R. 512; Fl~nagan v. Mate (1876) 2 Viet. L.R. 157 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·157
[1953] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 173. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15·040, 15·041, 15·042 Flannery v. St. Louis Architectural Iron 185 S.W. 760 (1916) 4·106
- v. Ministry of Transport (1965) 5Build. L.R. 94,H.L. [1960] 1 W.L.R. 956; 104 Fletcher v. Dyche (1787) 2 T.R. 32; 100 E.R. 18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10·007
S.J. 705; [1960) 3 All E.R. 88 ................ 3·012, 4·048, 4·039, 6·210, 6·212, --v. Laguna Vista Corporation (1973) 275 So. (2d) 579 7,097
7·013, 8·027, 8-029, 8·034, 8·100 Flexman v. Corbett [1930] 1 Ch. 672; (1930] All E.R. Rep. 420; 99 L.J. Ch. 370; 143
Farrow v. Wilson (1869) L.R. 4 C.P. 744; 38 L.J.C.P. 326; 20 L.T. 710; 18 W.R 43 2·056 L.T. 464 . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·044
Farthing v. Thompkins (1893) 9 T.L.R. 566. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·257, 2·258 Florida Hotels v. Mayo (1965) 113 C.L.R. 588 .................. 1·312, 1·318, 2·193
Feather (Thomas) & Co. (Bradford) v. Keighley Corporation (1933) 52 L.G.R. Foakes v. Beer (1884) 9 App. Cas. 605; [1881-5] All E.R. Rep. 106; 54 L.J.Q.B. 130;
30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-208, 8·113, 9·013, 9·014, 12·004, 12·059 51 L.T. 833;33 W.R. 233, H.L.; affirming sub nom Beer v. Foakes (1883) 11
Federal Bulle Carriers v. C. ltoh & Co.; Federal Bullcer, The [1989] 1 Lloyd's Rep. Q.B.D. 221, C.A............................. 1·074, 1-075, 1·076, 1·077
103, C.A. ......................... . . . . . . . . . 18-032 Fogelson v. Home Insurance (1987), New York Journal April 23, 1987.... 15·036, 15·037
Federal Commerce and Navigation Co. v. Molena Alpha Inc.; Nanfri, The; Benfri, Foley v. Classique Coaches [1934] 2 K.B. 1; 103 L.J.K.B. 550; 151 L.T. 242....... 1·043,
The; Lorfri, The [1979] A.C. 757; [1978} 3 W.L.R. 991; (1978) 122 SJ. 843; 1.047, 1·051
[1979) 1 All E.R. 307; [1979] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 201, H.L.; affirming in part [1978] - - v. Interactive Data Corp. 254 Cal. Rep. 211 (1988) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·197
Q.B. 927; [1978] 3 W.L.R. 309; (1978) 122 S.J. 347; [1978] 3 All E.R. 1066 Ford v. Beech (1848) 11 Q.B. 852; 17 L.J.Q.B.114; 11 L.T.(o.s.) 45; 12Jur. 310; 116
C.A.; reversing [1978] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 581. ....... 4·216, 4·217, 4·222, 6·196, 6·202 E.R. 693 Ex.Ch.; reversing (1846) 11 ·Q.B. 842; subsequent proceedings sub
Fehlhaber Corporation v. U.S. 151 Fed. Supp. 817 (1957) . 4·061 nom. Beech v. Ford (1848) 7 Hare 208 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·217
Felton v. Wharrie (1906) (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 396............ 4·214, 9·003;'9·023, 9·034, --v. ClarksonsHolidays [1971] 1 W.L.R.1412; 115 S.J. 642; [1971] 3AllE.R.454,
12-053, 12·080 C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·106
 lxviii TABLE OF CASES TABLE OF CASES lxix
Ford v. White & Co. (A Firm) [1964] 1 W.L.R. 885; 108 S.J. 542; [1964] 2 All E.R. Garrett v. Banstead and Epsom Downs Railway (1864) De GJ. & S. 462; 12 L.T.
753 ............. 2·207 654; 13 W.R. 878; 11 Jur.(N.s.) 591; 146 R.R. 399 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12·084
Ford & Co. and Bemrose & Sons, Re (1902) 18 T.L.R. 443; 4th ed., Vol. 2 --v. Salisbury Railway (1866) L.R. 2 Eq. 358. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11·048, 12·063, t:z.086
p. 324 . . . . 8·021 Garrud, Re, ex parte, Newitt. See Newitt, ex parte
Forestry Commission of New South Wales v. Stefanetto (1976) 133 C.L.R. 507, Gas & Fuel Corporation of Victoria v. Wood Hall Ltd. [1978) V.R. 385. 18·134A, 18·145,
High Ct. of Aus. . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,015 18·146, 18·147, 18·150, 18·156, 18·159E, 18·160
Forman v. The Liddesdale [1900] A.C. 190; 69 L.J.P.C. 44; 82 L.T. 331; 9 Asp. Gas Light and Coke Co. v. Turner (1840) 6 Bing. N.C. 324; 8Scott 609; 9 L.J.Ex. 336;
M.L.G. 45. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-011, 4·019, 4·020 5 Bing. N.C. 666; 7 Scott779; 9 L.J.C.P. 75; 54 R.R. 808 4·279
ForsikringsaktieselskapetVesta v. Butcher (No.1) [1989] A.C.852; [1989}2 W.L.R. Gaze (W.H.) & Sons Ltd. v. Port Talbot Corporation (1929) 93 J.P.R. 89; 27 L.G.R.
290; [1989] 1 All E.R. 402; (1989) 133 S.J. 184; 1989 Fin.L.R. 223; [1989] 1 200. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,154, 13,041
Lloyd's Rep. 331; [(1988) 4 Const. L.J. 75], H.L.; affirming [1988] 3 W.L.R. Geary, Walker & Co. v. Lawrence (1906) (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 382... 13·024, 13,101, 18·031
565; [1988] 2 All E.R. 43; (1988) 132 S.J. 1181; [1988] 1 F.T.L.R. 78; [1988] Gedge v. Royal Exchange Assurance Corporation [1900] 2 Q.B. 214; 69 L.J.Q.B.
F.L.R. 67; [1988] 1 Lloyd'sRep.19; [(1988) 4 Const. L.J. 75]; [1988] L.S.Gaz. 506; 82 L.T. 483; 16 T.L.R. 344; 9 Asp. M.L.C. 57; 5 Com. Cas. 229 . . . . . . 4·278
August 31, 33, C.A.; affirming [1986] 2 All E.R. 488; [1986] 2 Lloyd's Rep. Geiger v. Western Maryland Railway (1874) 41 Md. 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10·009, t:z.069
179 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 1·377 General Steam Navigation Co. v. Rolt (1858) 6 C.B.(N.s.) 550,584; 6Jur.(N.s.) 801; 8
Forsterv.Outred& Co. (a firm) [1982] 1 W.L.R.86; [1982]2AllE.R. 753;(1981) 125 W.R. 223; 120 R.R. 264. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17·028, 17·043, 17·044, 17·045, 17·046
S.J. 309...................... . . . . . . . 1·281, 1·307, 1·373 General Surety & Guarantee Co. v. Parker (Francis) (1977) 6 Build. L.R. 16
- v . Wilson (1843) 12 M. & W. 191 . . . . . . . . ...... 16·014 D.C.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... 17·021, 17-061, 17·078
Foster and Dicksee v. Hastings Corporation (1903) 87 L.T. 736; 19 T.L.R. 204 . . 12,085 George & Taylor & Co. Ltd. v. G. Percy Trentham Ltd. (1980) 16 BLR 15 . . 13·059
Gibbon v. Pease [1905] 1 K.B. 810; [1904-7) All E.R. Rep. 454; 74 LJ.K.B. 502; 92
Fottner v. Joseph (1859) 3 L.C.J. 233; S.C. 5 L.C.J. 226 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-258
Fowler v. Scottish Equitable Life Insurance Society & Ritchie (1858) 28 L.J. Ch. L.T. 433; 53 W.R. 417; 69 J.P. 209; 3 L.G.R. 461; 21 T.L.R. 365; 49 S.J. 382,
C.A.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·205, 2·272
225; 32 L.T.(o.s.) 119; 4 Jur. N.S. 1169; 7 W.R. 5 . 1·112
Gibraltar (Government of) v. Kenney [1956] 2 Q.B. 410; [1956] 3 W.L.R. 466; 100
Fox, Re Oundle and Thrapston Rural District Council v. The Trustee [1948] Ch.
S.J. 551; [1956] 3 All E.R. 22. . . . . . . . 18·007
407; [1948] L.J.R.1733; 112 J.P. 294; 92 S.J. 310; [1948] 1 All E.R. 849; 46
Gibson v. Manchester City Council [1979] 1 W.L.R. 294; [1979] 1 All E.R 972;
L.G.R 305. . . 11·036, 11·045, 16·053 (1979) 123 SJ. 201; (1979) 77 L.G.R. 405; [1979] J.P.L. 532, H.L.; reversing
- - v. Wellfair (P.G.). See Fisher v. Wellfair (P.G.); Fox v. Wellfair (P.G.)
[1978] 1 W.L.R. 520; [1978] 2 All E.R. 583; (1978) 122 S.J. 80; (1978) 76
Francis v. Cockerell (1870) L.R. 5 Q.B. 501; lOB. & S. 950; 39 L.J.Q.B. 291;23 L.T. L.G.R. 365; [1978] J.P.L. 246, C.A.. . . . . . . 1·022, 1·028
466;18W.R.1205... ......... 4·118 Gilbert & Partners (A Finn) v. Knight. See Gilbert & Partners v. Knight
Frazer v. Jordan (1857) 8 E. & B. 303; 26 L.J.Q.B. 288; 3 Jur. 1054. . . . . . 17·035, 17.041 Gilbert & Partners v. Knight (1968) 112 S.J. 155; sub nom. Gilbert & Partners (A
Frederick Betts Ltd. v. Pickfords Ltd. [1906] 2 Ch. 87; 75 L.J. Ch. 483; 94 L.T. 363; 54 Firm) v. Knight [1968] 2 All E.R. 248, C.A....... 1·064, 1·271, 2·237, 2·284, 7·086
W.R. 476; 22 T.L.R. 315 . :Z.063 Gilbert-Ash (Northern) v. Modem Engineering (Bristol) [1974] A.C. 689; [1973] 3
Frederik Nielsen (Canberra) Pty. Ltd. v. P.D.C. Construction (A.C.T.) Pty. Ltd. W.L.R. 421; 117 S.J. 745; (1973] 3 All E.R. 195; 72 L.G.R. 1, H.L.; reversing
(1984), noted in (1988) 7 A.C.L.R. 44 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·291 subnom. Modern Engineering (Bristol) v. Gilbert-Ash (Northern) (1973) 71
Freeth v. Burr (1874) L.R. 9 C.P. 208; 43 L.J.C.P. 91; 29 L.T. 733; 22 W.R. 370 4·221 LG.R. 162, C.A................ 4·222, 5·011, 5·014, 5·015, 6·004, 6·005, (5·006,
Freeman v. Hensler (1900) (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 292; 64 J.P. 260. . . . . . . . . . . 4·144, 4-147 6·009, 6·031, 6·043, 6·045, 6·054, 6·058, 6·059, 6-083, 6·089, 6·093, 6·095,
- - v. Marshall (1966) 200 E.G. 777 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :Z.206 6·190, 6·193, 6·195, 6·197, 6-198, 6·200, 6·203, 8·106, 8·107, 10·014, 12·055,
Frontenac Air Systems Ltd. v. Parmac Construction Ltd. (1978) 87 D.L.R. (3d) 277 4,093 13·117, 14·066, 16·003, 17·016, 17·029, 18·041, 18·055
Frost v. Knight (1872) L.R. 7 Ex. 111; 41 L.J. Ex. 78; 26 L.T. 77; 20 W.R. 471. . . . . 4·225, Gilbert Blasting & Dredging Co. v. R (1901) 7 Can. Ex. R. 221; 33 S.C.R. 21 . . . 7·045
12·077 Gillespie Brothers & Co. v. Bowles (Roy) Transport; Rennie Hogg (Third Party)
Fulham Borough Council and the National Electric Construction Co. Ltd. Re. [1973] 1 Q.B. 400; [1972] 3 W.L.R. 1003; 116 S.J. 861; [1973] 1 All E.R. 193;
(1905)70J.P. 55 . . . .............. . 3·049 [1973] 1 Lloyd's Rep.10; [1973] R.T.R. 95, C.A.; reversing [1972) R.T.R. 65;
Fuller v. Patrick (1849) 18 L.J.Q.B. 236; 13 Jur.(o.s.) 561 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-250 [1971] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 521. .................... 15·041, 15.o43, 15·044, 15·059
--v. The Queen (1878) 3 J.R.N.S. (s.c.) 125 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10·032 Gillespie & Co. v. Howden & Co. (1885) 22 Sc. L.R. 527 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-112
Fuller (Thomas) Construction v. Continental Insurance (1973) 36 D.L.R. 3d. Gillett v. Thornton (1875) L.R. 19 Eq. 599; 44 L.J.Ch. 398; 23 W.R. 437. . 18·025, 18-026
336........... . . . ..... 17·028, 17-031, 17·043 Glanzer v. Shepard (1931) N.Y. 236 . . . . . . 1·281
Fulton v. Domwell (1885) 4 N.Z.L.R.S.C. 207 . . 12·072 Glasgow & South Western Railway v. Boyd & Forrest [1915] A.C. 526; 84 L.J. P.C.
157. . . . . . . . ......... 1·147, 3·077
Gleeson (M.J.) (Contractors) Ltd. v. Hillingdon Borough Council (1970) 215 E.G.
G.K.N. Contractors v. Lloyds Bank (1985) 30 Build. L.R. 48, C.A.. . . . 17·067, 17·068 165. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·228, 10·061
Galbraith's Stores v. Glasgow Corporation, 1958 S.L.T. (Sh.Ct.) 47; 74 Sh.Ct. Rep. Gleeson (M.V.) (Contractors) Ltd. v. Sleaford Urban District Council (1953)
126 . . . . . . . 8·194 (Unrep.). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·021, 8·048
Gallagher v. Hirsch N.Y. 45 App. Div. 467 (1899) New York; 61 N.Y. Supp. 607 . 4·202, Glenn v. Leith (1853) I.C.L.R. 569; 21 L.T.(o.s.) 141. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-037, 6·043
7·046 Glenlion Construction v. Guiness Trust (1988) 39 BLR 89; (1988) 11 Con. LR. 126;
- v . McDowell Ltd. [1961] N.I. 26; [14 N.I.L.Q. 488]. . . . . . . . . . . 1·308, 1·314, 1·316 (1988) 4 Const. L.J. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-041
Gallie v. Lee. See Saunders (formerly Gallie) v. Anglia Building Society Gloucestershire County Council v. Richardson. See Gloucestershire County Coun-
- v . Lee [1969] 2 Ch.17; [1969] 2 W.L.R. 901; [1969] 1 AllE.R.1062; 113 SJ.187; cil v. Richardson (Trading as W.J. Richardson & Son).
20P.&C.R.310.......... 1·106 --v. Richardson (Trading as W.J. Richardson&Son) [1969] 1 A.C. 480; [1968] 3
Gallivan v. Killarney Urban District Council [1912] 21.R. 356. . . . 10·035, 10·040, 10·041, W.L.R. 645;sub nom. Glo'ucestershire County Council v. Richardson [1968]
10.074 ZAil E.R. 1181; 112 S.J. 759; 67 L.G.R. 15; [31 M.L.R. 221), H.L.; affirming
Gaitan v. Emuss (1844) 13 L.J. Ch. 388; 8 Jur.(o.s.) 307 . . . . . . . . . . . . 3·080 [1967]3 All E.R. 458, C.A.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·231, 2·145, 2·170, 4·068,
Gamer v. Strickland [1955] 4 D.L.R. 329 Ct. of App. B.C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .,.. .-, 14·064 4·071, 4·073, 4·074, 4·079, 4·086, 4· 118, 4-122,
Garrard v. Frankel (1862) 30 Beav. 445; 31 L.J.Ch. 604; 8 Jur.(N.s.) 985; 132 R;R. 4·124, 4·125, 4·185, 4·189, 5·033, 5·036, 5·038,
352; 26 J.P. 727; 54 E.R. 961. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·116, 1·122 7·007, 7·027, 7·031, 12·005, 12·019, 12·020, 13·008, 13·063
 !xx TABLE OF CASES
TABLE OF CASES lxxi
Glow Heating v. Eastern Health Board (1988) 6 I.L.T. 237. . . . . . 13·125, 13·127, 13·130,
Greater Nottingham Co-operative Society v. Cementation Piling and Foundations
W ~~
ynnM
v. argetson & Co. [1893] A-C?· 351; 62L.J.Q.B. 466; 69 L. T. l; 9T.L.R. 437; l [1989] Q.B. 71, C.A.; [1988] 3 W.L.R. 396; (1988) 132 S.J. 754; [1988] 2 All
fsp. M.L.C. 366; H.L., affirm mg sub nom. Margetson v. Glynn [1892] 1 Q.B. E.R. 971; (1988) 41 BLR 43; (1988) 4 Const. L.J. 216; (1988) 138 New L.J.
7 112; C.A.; reversing [1985] C.I.L.L. 160. . . . . . . . . . 13·043, 13·045, 13-058, 13·059
GoddarJ ~- ·o·Brie~· (1882). 9Q.B.D .. i1; 46 "i:T.' 30 30 W.R. ·549: D~ ·c~ y·
6:
11 1 225
1 a~;; , · Greaves & Co. Contractors Ltd. v. Baynham Meikle & Partners [1975] 1 W.L.R.
County Court Cases 110 D c ' ' 1095; [1975] 3 All E.R. 99; 119 S.J. 372; [1975] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 325, C.A.;
Goetz, Re, ex parte The Truste; [1898] i ·o.B: 787 . . . l ·075 affirming [1974] 1 W.L.R. 1261; [1974] 3 All E.R. 666; 118 S.J. 595; [1975] 1
Gold v. Pa~man & Fotheri~gham [1958] 1 W.L.R. 69·7; i02"S.i. 470; [i9s8j 2Ai1 E.R:
I ·ZOO Lloyd's Rep. 31. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·182, 2·092, 2·102, 2·104, 2·105, 3·026, 3·028
497, [1958] 1 Lloyds Rep. 587; C.A.; reversing [1957] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 319. . . 1·228, Green v. Sevin (1879) 13 Ch.D. 589; 49 L.J.Ch. 166; 41 L.T. 724 . . . . . . . . . . . . 9·022

Goldwasser v. U.S. 325 F. 2nd 722 (1963) . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . 15·0l4, ~I~f' - v . Fibreglass Ltd. [1958] 2 Q.B. 245; [1958] 3 W.L.R. 71; [1958] 2 AllE.R. 521;
102 S.J. 472. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·333, 1·387
goo~~Jn v. Layborn (1881) Roscoe, Dig. ofB.C. (4th ed.) p. 162....... .'.'6··i62 6·15~ Green (R.H.) &SilleyWeir v. British Railways Board [1985] 1 AIIE.R. 237; (1980)
oo n ge Holder v. Wyong Shire Council (1985) (SC of NSW) ' 17Build.L.R.94. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·289,4·290
July 24 1985 · · · · ·
Goodwin v. st'ephens~~ ~~ci w;tt [19671.i N·s· wR. 6i1' . 1·351 Greene v. West Cheshire Railway (1871) L.R.13 Eq. 44; 25 L.T. 409;41 L.J.Ch.17
Greenhalgh v. British Railways Board [1969] 2 Q.B. 286; [1969] 2 W.L.R. 892; [1969]
4-302
Good~ & So~s v. Fawcett (1965) 175 E.G. ·27 .' . : ... : . . . . . . . . . . . 18: 119
Goodwms, Jardine & Co. v. Brand (1905) 7 F. (Ct. of Sess.) 995 . .... : : : . ij.i(}O
Goody~~; v. Weymouth Corporation (1865) 35 L.J.C.P. 12; H. & R. 67; 148 RR. '
43
035
i~.o 2 All E.R. 114; 113 S.J.108, C.A.
Greenhill v. Isle of Wight Railway (1871) 23 L.T. 885; 19 W.R. 345 ...... .
1·336
4-298
Greenock Corporation v. Caledonian Railway [1917] A.C. 556; 86 L.J.C.P. 185; 117
&' 2
Goold v. Ev·a~~ C~.'ri951J 'T.L.'R. '1i89· ·c 1·
047
, 6·048, 6·049, 6·050, 6-134, 7·065, 7·099 L.T. 483; 81 J.P. 269; 33 T.L.R. 531; 62 S.J. 8; 15 L.G.R. 749 ..... .
Gregg v. Bromley [1912] 2 K.B. 474 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Goolden v. Anstee (1868) 18 L. T. 898 . . ' · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 18·133
Greswolde-Williams v. Barneby (1900) 83 L.T. 708; 49 W.R. 203; 17 T.L.R. 110.
Gordon v. Miller (1838) 1 Ct. of Sess. cas.' (·2~d ·s~~.) D. 832. ·. ·. ·. ·. . . . . . .
2·1981:~~
Griffin, Re [1899] 1 Ch. 408; 68 L.J.Ch. 220; 79 L,T. 442; 15 T.L.R. 78;
Gordon Durham & Co. v. Hayden Young (1990) 52 BLR 61; [i991J '
43 S.J. 96 14·058
S'A ·
Gorfin~?;.~·:~:~ri; i954· ( 1)
Goss v.~:.nJ1~ (1842) 3M. & G: 825;4S~ttN.R.47i; i2L."/C.P: i13; j JJ;.
0
:i;~~
· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 13·047, 13·048, 13-050
88 30 5
• 6-0 l
Grills (J.R.) Ltd. v. Dellios (1988) V.R. 136
Grinaker Construction (Transvaal) (Proprietary) v. Transvaal Provincial
Administration (1982) 20 Build L.R. 30, Supreme Ct. of South Africa;
11·031

Government ofC.e)'io~·~. Cb~~dn~. s~; C~Y1~~

'cGo~~~m~.;t ~f)· ~. cha~d~;
Government of Gibraltar v. K_enney. See Gibraltar (Government of) v. Kenne
11·014 1 S.A.L.R. 78. . . . . . . . ... 7·018, 8·003, 8·013, 8·037, 8·039
Grist v. Bailey [1967] Ch. 532; [1966] 3 W.L.R 618; [1966} 2 All E.R. 875; 110 S.J.
v.
Governors of Peabody Donation Fund Parkinson (Sir Lmdsay) & Co See
body Donation Fund v. Su Lindsay Parkinson ·
lea- 791; [30 Conv. 396] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Groom v. Crocker [1939] 1 K.B.194. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·372, 2·083
1·105

Govindram Seksaria v. Edward Radbone (1947) L.R. 74 Ia. 295. 126 Grove v. Johnstone (1889)"24 L.R. Ir. 352 4·271
Grace v. Osler (1911) 19 W.L.R. 109, 326 (Canada) . . . . . . . . . . ·.. . . . . 4, 1·265, 4·240 Guild v. Conrad [1894] 2 Q.B. 885; 63 L.J.Q.B. 721; 71 L.T.140; 12 W.R. 642; 9 R.
Grafton v. Eastern Counties Ry. (1853) 8 Ex. 699 . 21 LT ( ) 4, ~5 o, 4 054 746; lOT.L.R.549 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17·017
91 R.R. 712 • · · o.s. 94, Gus Property Management Ltd. v. Littlewoods Mail Order Stores Ltd. 1982 S.L.T.
&
Graham v. Morris s~~s.[i974] Qd R
·1 · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·025, 6·037
Graham & Baldwin v. Taylor, Son &D~vis '(i965) '109 S.J: 793.; i96 E:a.·3·os::: l~~2 533. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·227, 14·032, 14-035
Gwyther v. Gaze (1875) (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 34. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·069, 2·283

Graham Roberts Ltd. v. Maurbeth Ltd. [1974J 1 N.S.W.L.R. 93. . . . . . . . . . 4·145 f32tf
Grainger v. Raybould (1840) 9 C. & P. 229 12·001,'12-09.J H. & S. Alexander v. Housing Commission of Victoria [1985] 4 A.C.L.R. 85. . . . . 1,052,
8 087
Gran Gelato Ltd. v. Richcliff (Group) Ltd: [1992f Ch.' 560; [19921· 2W.L:R.'
867; · 8·220, 8·221
[1992] 1 All E.R. 865; [1992] 1 E.G.L.R. 297; [1991] E.G.C.S.136; (1992) 142 Hackney Borough Council v. Dove [1922] 1 K.B. 431; 91 L.J.K.B. 109; 126 L.T. 375;
New L.J. 51; The Independent, December 18, 1991; The Times, December 19 86 J.P. 45; 38 T.L.R. 93; 20 L.G.R. 88 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1991 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • Hadley v. Baxendale (1854) 9 Ex. 341; 23 L.J.Ex. 179; 18Jur.(o.s.) 358; 23 L.T.( o.s.)
1·289
Grant (John) & Sons Ltd. v. Trocadero (1938) 60 C.L.R. 1. . ... 6·062, 6·068, 18·037, 69; 2 C.L.R. 517; 2 W.R. 302; 96 RR. 742 ....... 8·089, 8·093, 8·095, 8·096, 8·109,
18·038, 18·041 8·113, 8·123, 8·156, 8·162, 8·163, 8·164, 8·179, 8·199, 8·215
Grant Plant Hir~ v. Trickey (1961) 105 S.J. 255 ........ . --v. Droitwich Construction Co.; Pugsley (Joseph) & Sons (Third Party) [1968] 1
Gravely v. Providence Partnerships 549 F. (2d) 958 (1977) . 14-068
2·088 W.L.R. 37; 111 SJ. 849; (1967) 3 K.I.R. 578; sub nom. Hadley v. Droitwich
Graves v. Cohen (1930) 46 T.L.R. 121 . Construction Co.; (Pugsley (Joseph) & Sons, Third Party) [1967] 3 All E.R.
Gray v. Barr, Prudential Assurance Co. (Titi~d P~~tyj [197i ii (i.B.' j54; [l97i Ji
2·056
911,C.A.... 15·043
W.L.R. 133~; 115 S.J. 364; [1971] 2 All E.R. 949· [1971] 2 Lloyd's Re 1 Hagop Ardahalian v. Unifert International S.A.; Elissar, The [1984] 2 Lloyd's Rep.
C.A.; affirmmg [1970] 2 Q.B. 626; [1970] 3 W.L.R. '108; [1970] 2 All E R ~{)2'. 84, C.A.; affirming [1984] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 206; (1983) 133 New L.J. 1103. . . 18·138,
sub nom_. Gray v. Barr (1970) 114 S.J. 413; sub nom. Gray & Gra ~. Barr' 18·140, 18·142, 18·145, 18·149
Prudential Assurance Co. (Third Party) [1970] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 69 y ' 12·043 Halbot v. Lens [1901] 1 Ch. 344; 70 L.J.Ch. 125; 83 L.T. 702; 49 W.R. 214 . . . . . . 2·080
Gray (T.P.) v. Bennett & Son (1987) 43 BLR 63; 13 Con. L.R. 22..... : .': .' i.30o, 2·195, Halifax Overseas Freighters v. Rasno Export; Technoprominport; and Polskie
Linie Oceaniczne P.P.W. The Pine Hill [1958] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 146 18·111
Great Lake Dredge & Dock Co. v. City of Chicago 288 N.E. (2d) 1 (1972) ::~~
5 Hall v. Burke (1886) 3 T.L.R. 165 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·080
Grea~N~~hi!~ ~~. ~: Wiih.~(1873).L.R. 9·c.P."i6;43 L:/C.P: i;· i2 8 ' 201 --v. Wembley Electrical Appliances [1947] 2 All E.R. 630 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·255
29·L.r·47·1: --v. Wright (1859) E.B. & E. 746, 765;6Jur.193;29L.J.Q.B. 43; 8 W.R.160; 113
Greate~~:;~ c~~~cil·v: Cie~~ia~d Eirid&~ ~~d
E~gin~~;i~g C~.' ci986) ·3~ Bu'.ili
3 073
• R.R. 861, 874 . . . .
Hall & Tawse Construction v. Strathclyde·Regional Council (1990) S.L.T. 774 . . 8·098
14·071
L.~. 50, (1987) 8 Con. L.R. 30 C.A.; affirming [1984] C.I.L.L. 106; (1984-}.34
Budd. L.R. 50. · · · · · · · . . . 9·005, 9,037, 9·039 Halliday v. Hamilton's (Duke) Trustees (1903) 5 F. (Ct. of Sess.) 800...... 6·103, 6,136,
6·137
 lxxii TABLE OF CASES
r TABLE OF CASES lxxiii
Hambro Life Assurance pie v. White, Young & Partners (1987) 38 Build. L.R. 16; Hartley v. Hymans [1920] 3 K.B. 475; 90 LJ.K.B. 14; 124 L.T. 31; 36 T.L.R. 805; 25
(1988) 4 Const. L.J. 48; (1987) 284 E.G. 227, C.A.; affirming (1987) 8 Con. Com. Cas. 365 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9·022
L.R. 130; (1986) 33 Build. L.R. 119; {1985] 2 E.G.LR. 165; (1985) 275 E.G. - - v. Mayoh & Co. and the N.W. Electricity Board [1954] 1 Q.B. 383; [1954] 1
1127; (1985) 1 Const. L.J. 287; [1985] C.I.L.L. 189, C.A . . . . . . 1·350 W.L.R. 355; [1954] 1 All E.R. 375; 118 J.P. 178; 98 S.J. 107; 52 L.G.R. 165;
Hampton v. Glamorgan County Council [1917] A.C.13; 86 L.J.K.B.106; 115 L.T. [217 L.T. 164; 70 L.Q.R. 154], C.A.; affirming in part and reversing in part
726; 81 J.P. 41; 15 L.G.R. 1; 33 T.L.R. 58, H.L....... 1·220, 13·009, 13-016, 13·017, [1953] 2 AllE.R. 525; 117 J.P. 369; [17 conv. 306]; [1953} C.L.Y. 2422 . . . . 1·308,
13·032, 13·035, 13·036, 13·037, 13-039, 13·088, 13·089, 13·092, 13·110 1·315
Hampshire v. Wickens {1878) 7 Ch.D. 555; 47 L.J.Ch. 243; 38 L.T. 408; 26 W.R. Harvey v. Facey [1893] A.C. 552; 62 L.J.P.C. 127; 1 R. 428; 69 L.T. 504; 42 W.R.
491 .. 1·044 129 1·022
Hanak v. Green [1958] 2 Q.B. 9; [1958] 2 W.L.R. 755; 102 S.J. 329; [1958] 2AHE.R. --v. Lawrence (1867) 15 L.T. 571. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·047, 6·052, 6·058, 11·064
141; C.A.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... 8·118, 14·049 --v. Shelton (1844) 7 Beav. 455 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·137
Hancock v. Brazier (B.W.) (Anerley) Ltd. [1966] 1 W.L.R. 1317; [1966] 2 All E.R. Hatrick (A.C.) (N.Z.) v. Nelson Carlton Construction Co. (In Liquidation) [1964]
901; C.A.; affirming 110 S.J. 368; [1966] 2 All E.R. 1. . . . 1·182, 1·191, 3·028, 4·071, N.Z.LR. 72 ...... , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·067, 6·123, 6·134, 6·142, 6·224, 6·228
4·072, 4·075, 4·078, 4·097, 4· 105, 4· 118, 4·120, 5·052, 5·054, 5,056, 6·056, Hattersley v. Hatton (1862) 3 F. & F. 116 . 18·026
6·082, 8·113 Hauman v. Nortje [1914) A.D. 293 . . . . . . . . 4·019
Hansen and Yuncken v. Chadmix Plastics [1985] B.C.L.R. 52, Australia . 7·084 Hawkins v. Burrell (1902) N.Y. 69 App. Div. 462 6·207
Hanson (W.) (Harrow) v. Rapid Civil Engineering and Usborne Developments - v. Clayton (1988) 164 C.L.R. 539........ . .... 2·083, 2·108, 8·110
(1987) 38 Build. L.R. 106; (1988) 11 Con. L.R. 119. . . . . . . 11·010, 11·026, 11·031, Hawkins (George) v. Chrysler (U.K.) and Burne Associates (A Finn) (1986) 38
11·044, 11·054, 11·057, 11·058 Build. L.R. 36, C.A................... 1·182, 2·092, 2·093, 2,104, 2·105, 3·029
Harbottle (RD.) (Merchantile) Ltd. v. National Westminster Bank [1978] Q.B. Hawthorn v. Newcastle~upon-Tyne & North Shields Railway (1840) 3 Q.B. 734 n.; 2
146; [1977] 3 W.L.R. 752; [1977] 121 S.J. 745; [1977] 2 All E.R. 862. 17·067 Rail Cas. 288; 9 L.J.Q.B. 385; 61 R.R. 381 n ........ 4·216, 11·022, 11·037, 11·049,
Harbour Assurance Co. (U.K.) v. Kansa General International Insurance Co. Ltd. 11·059, 11·060
(1993] Q.B. 701. . . . ......... 18·007, 18·008, 18·009, 18·010, 18·098, 18·099 Hayes v. Dodd (James & Charles) (A Finn) [1990] 2 All E.R. 815, C.A.. . . . 2·210, 8·160
Harburg India Rubber Comb Co. v. Martin [1902} 1 K.B. 778; 71 L.J.K.B. 529; 86 Hayes, Trustee of Preload Co. of Canada v. City of Regina (1959) 20 D.L.R. (2d)
L.T. 505; 50 W.R. 449; 18 T.L.R. 428 586... . ......... 4·089, 17·029, 17·035, 17·050
17·017 Head v. Head [1894] 2 Ch. 236; 63 L.J.Ch..549; 70 L.T. 608; 42 W.R. 419. . . . . . . 14·023
Harbutt's "Plasticine" Ltd. v. Wayne Tank and Pump Co. Ltd. [1970) 1 Q.B. 447;
Heaven and Kesterton v. Sven Widaeus A/B [1958] 1 W.L.R. 248; 102 S.J. 161;
[1970] 2 W.L.R.198; [1970] 1 All E.R. 225; 114S.J. 29; [1970} 1 Lloyd's Rep.
[1958] 1 All E.R. 420; [1958] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 101. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·178, 18·192
15; [33 M.L.R. 441; 86 L.Q.R. 513], C.A..... 1·231, 5·061, 8·128, 8·130, 8·144, 8·181 Hedley Byrne & Co. Ltd. v. Heller & Partners Ltd. [1964] A.C. 465; [1963] 3 W.L.R.
Hardeman (Paul) v. Arkansas Power 380 F. Supp. 298 (1974) . . . . . . . . . 1·197 101; [1963] 2 All E.R. 575; 107 S.J. 454; [1963] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 485. . . . . . 1·027,
Hardwick Game Farm .v. Suffolk Agricultural and Poultry Producers' Association; 1·128, 1·130, 1·132, 1·134, 1·135, 1·137, 1·142, 1·154, 1·157,
Lillico (William) (First Third Party); Grimsdale & Sons·(Second Third 1·158, 1 ·159, 1·167, 1·178, 1·274, 1 ·275, 1·277, 1·278, 1 ·279,
Party); Kendall (Henry) and Sons (First Fourth Party); Holland-Colombo 1·280, i:281, 1·282, 1·285, 1·286, 1·287, 1·288, 1·291, 1·292,
Trading Society (Second Fourth Party). See Kendall (Henry) & Sons (A 1·292A, 1·293, 1·294, 1·295, 1 ·296, 1·296A, 1·296B, 1·297, 1·299,
Firm) v. Llllico (William) & Sons 1·302, 1·306, 1·307, 1·309, 1·319, 1·323, 1·326, 1·346, 1·354,
Hardy v. Wannsley-Lewis (1967) 203 E.G. 1039 .. 2·207 1·356, 1 ·358, 1·360, 1·366, 1·369, 1·372, 1·373, 1·374, 1·375,
Hargreaves Transport v. Lynch [1969] 1 W.L.R. 215; 112 S.J. 54; [1969] 1 All E.R. 1·378, 1 ·379, 2·073, 2·076, 2·083, 2·084, 2·092, 2· 106, 2· 110,
455; 20 P. & C.R. 143, C.A. . . . . . 3·060 2·120, 2·159, 2·166, 2·212, 2·221, 2·232, 3·078, 4·045, 4·129,
Harman v. Scott (1874) 2 Johnst. N.Z. Rep. 407. . . . . .... 6·162, 6·163 4·131, 4·142, 4·143, 4·284, 4·287, 6·110, 6-228, 8·223, 13-021,
Harmer v. Cornelius (1858) 5 C.B.(N.s.) 236;28 L.J.C.P. 85;4Jur. 1110; 31 L.T.( o.s.) 13·042, 13·044, 13·045, 13·110, 18·007, 18·047, 18·071
102, 236; 6 W.R. 749; 116 R.R. 654 ... 4·124 Hedlin (J.D.) Construction v. U.S. 347 F. (2d) 235 (1965) .......... 4·061, 7-088, 8·196
Harper Davidson v. Keywest Building Ltd. (1988) 7 A.C.L.R. 54 ... 18·178 Heffer v. Martyn (1867) 36 L.J.Ch. 372; 15 W.R. 390 . . . . . 3·080
Harrington v. Victoria Graving Dock Co. (1878) 3 Q.B.D. 549; 47 LJ.Q.B. 594; 39 Heilbut, Symons& Co. v. Buckleton [1913] A.C. 30; [1911-13] AllE.R. Rep. 83; 82
L.T. 120; 26 W.R. 740 ........ . 2,234 L.J.K.B. 245; 107 L.T. 769; 20 Mans. 54, H.L.......... 1 ·142, 1·154, 1·167, 1·211,
Harris v. Demolition Contractors [1979] 2 N.Z.L.R. 166 ....... . 1·350 1 ·212, 1·213, 13·021
- v . Nickerson (1873) L.R. 8 Q.B. 286,42 LJ.Q.B.171;28 L.T. 410; 21 W.R. 635 Helena Curtis Industries v. U.S. 312 F. (2d) 774 (1963). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·150, 4·203
37 J.P. 536 1·020 Helfand v. Royal Canadian Art Pottery (1969) 8 D.L.R. (3d) 125 . . . . . . . . . . . 15-056
- v. Wyre Forest District Council [1990] 1 A.C. 831. See Smith v. Eric S. Bush; Helicopter Sales (Australia) Pty. v. Rotor-Work Pty. (1974) 48 A.L.J.R. 390,
Harris v. Wyre Forest District Council . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·241 Australia High Ct. . . . . 4-123
Harris (J.W.) & Sons v. Demolition & Roading Contractors (N.Z.) [1979) 2 He ls tan Securities v. Hertfordshire County Council [1978] 3 All E.R. 262,sub nom.
N.Z.L.R. 166, N.Z. Sup. Ct. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·373 Hestan Securities v. Hertfordshire County Council (1978) 76 L.G.R. 735
Harris Corporation v. National Iranian Radio 691 F. 2d.1344, 1982, U.S. C.A. llth Hemming v. Hale (1859) 7 C.B.(N.s.) 487; 29 L.J.C.P. 137; 6 Jur.(N.s.) 554; 8 W.R.
Circuit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ 17·069, 17·071 116 ................ 2·185
Harrison, Re, ex parte Jay. See Jay, ex parte, re Harrison Henderson v. Henderson (1843) 3 Hare 100; [1843-60] All E.R. Rep. 378; 1
~-v. Seymour (1866) L.R. 1 C.P. 318; Har & Ruth 567; 35 L.J.C.P. 264....... 17·042, L.T.(o.s.) 410; 67 E.R. 313. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·251, 1·252
- - v. McDonald Swimming Pools Ltd. 1972 S.L.T. 37, Sh.Ct. 1·078
17-051 --v. Massey (Raymond) Builders (Schiesser, Third Party) (1963)43 D.L.R. (2d)
- v. Thompson (1989] 1 W.L.R. 1325; (1989) 133 S.J. 1345; [1989) L.S.Gaz.
45..... 4·105
November 22, 41. . . . . . . . . .... 18·181, 18·191
Hendy Lennox (Industrial Engines) v. Grahame Puttick (1984] 1 W.L.R. 485;
Harrison (M.) & Co. (Leeds) Ltd. v. Leeds City Council (1980) 14 Build. L.R. 118,
(1984) 128 SJ. 220; [1984] 2 All E.R.152; [1984] 2Lloyd's Rep. 422; (1984) 81
C.A.................... 13·0n
L.S.Gaz. 585. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11·005, 11·058
Harrison (W.F.) & Co. Ltd. v. Burke [1956] 1 W.L.R. 419; lOOS.J. 300; [1956] 2 All Hennegan v. United States (1883) 17 Ct. of Cl. 273; U.S. Dig. (1883), p. 159 J.2.069
E.R. 169 ..... T ., • 14·016 Henthorn v. Fraser [1892] 2 Ch. 27; 61 L.J.Ch. 373; 66L.T. 439;40 W.R. 433; 8T.L.R.
Hart v. Porthgain Harbour [1903] 1 Ch. 690; 72 L.J.Ch. 426; 88 L.T. 341; 51 W;R. 459; 36 S.J. 380; [1891-4] All E.R. Rep. 908 . . . 1·040
461....... . .......... 11·028, 11·029, 11·032, 11·035, 11·041 Hepburn v. Leather (1884) 50 L.T. 660 4·300
 lxxiv TABLE OF CASES TABLE OF CASES lxxv
Herkules Piling v. Tilbury Construction, (1992) 61 BLR 107; The Times,September Holden v. White (1982] Q.B. 679; [1982] 2 W.L.R. 1030; [1982] 2 All E.R. 328; (1982)
21, 1992 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......... ............ 14·039 126 S.J. 230, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 1·336
Hermcrest v. G. Percy Trentham 53 BLR 104; 25 Con. LR. 78, C.A.; affirming 24 Holland Dredging (U.K.) v. The Dredging and Construction Co. and Imperial
Con. L.R.117.. ................ 6·199 Chemical Industries (Third Party) (1987) 37 Build. L.R. 1, C.A.. 7·019, 7·021,
Hersent Offshore S.A. v. Burmah Oil Tankers (1978) 10 Build. L.R. 1; [1978] 2 7·034, 8·029
Lloyd's Rep. 565, D.C.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-134, 7·053 Holland Hannen & Cubitts (Northern) v. Welsh Health Technical Services
Heyman v. Darwins. [1942] A.C. 356; [1942] 1 All E.R. 337; 111 L.J.K.B. 241; 166 Organisation (1987) 7 Con. L.R. 1; (1987) 35 Build. L.R. 1; [1985] C.I.L.L.
L.T. 306; 58 T.L.R. 169..... 1·143, 1·349, 1·354, 1·355, 1·356, 4·227, 12·008, 12·059, 217, C.A.. . .... 1·190, 2·104, 2-121, 2·155, 2·198, 2-200,
18·007, 18·008, 18·041, 18·096, 18·098, 18·103, 18·108, 18·118, 18·119, 18·125 4,()95, 4· 108, 5·038, 7..035, 13·029
Heyman Construction v. Algrephy February 1966, (Unrep.) . . . . . . . 12·078 - - v. Yeovil Rural District Council (1964) (Unrep.) Q.B.D., Special Paper . . . 3-064
Heys v. Tindall (1861) 1 B. & S. 296; 30 L.J.Q.B. 362; 2F. & F. 444; 4 L.T. 403; 9 W.R. Holle bone v. Midhurst and Femhurst Builders and Eastman & White of Midhurst
664; 124 R.R. 564 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·165 [1968] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 38, (1968) 118 New L.J. 156...... 2·208, 8·108, 8·127, 8·130,
Heywood v. Wellers (A Firm) [1976] Q.B. 446; [1976] 2 W.L.R. 101; (1975) 120 S.J. 8·134, 8·140, 8·141, 8·143
9; [1976] 1 All E.R. 300; [1976] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 88, C.A ................. 8·160 Hollenbach v. U.S. 233 U.S. 165 (1914) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·061
Hick v. Raymond [1893] A.C. 22; 62 L.J.Q.B. 98; 68 L.T.175; 41 W.R. 384; 7 Asp. Hollier v. Rambler Motors (A.M.C.) [1972] 2 Q.B. 71; [1972] 2 W.L.R. 401; [1972] 1
M.C. 233. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9·024, 9·025, 9·029, 9·030, 9·035 All E.R. 399; (1971) 116 S.J. 158; [1972] R.T.R. 190, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·202
Hickman v. Kent & Romney Marsh Sheepbreeders' Association [1915] 1 Ch. 881; Holman v.Johnson (1774) 1 Cowp.341............................. 4·277
84 L.J.Ch. 688; 113 L.T. 159; 59 S.J. 478 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·025 Holme v. Brunskill (1877) 3 Q.B.D. 495; 47 L.J.C.P. 81; 47 L.J.Q.B. 610;
Hickman & Co. v. Roberts [1913] A.C. 229; 821..J.K.B. 678; 108 L.T. 436 n.; sub 38 L.T. 838. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17·013, 17·019, 17·034, 17·036, 17·039, 17·046, 17·053
nom. Roberts v. Hickman & Co. (1896) (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 426 ...... 6·096, 6·113, - v . Guppy (1838) 3M. & W. 387; 1 Jur.(o.s.) 825; 49 R.R. 647. . . . . . . 9·008, 10·025,
6·123, 6-130, 6·131, 6·142, 6·143, 6-144, 6·221, 6·228, 18·067 10-027, 10·029, 10·031, 10·032, 10·035, 10·036, 10·040
Higgs & Hill Building v. Campbell (Denis) [1983] Com. L.R. 34; (1982) 28 Build. Holroyd v. Marshall (1862) 10 H.L.C.191;33 L.J.Ch.193; 9 Jur.(N.s.) 213; 7 L.T. 172;
LR.47,D.C.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·006,18·117,18·155 11 W.R. 171; 138 R.R. 108 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14·041
High Mark (M) SdnBhd v. PatcoMalaysiaSdnBhd (1984) 28 Build.L.R.129,High Holt, Re, ex parte Gray (1888) 58 L.J.Q.B. 5. . . . . . . . . . . 13·110, 13·121, 13·122, 13·123,
Ct. of Malaya . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·281 16..010, 16·054
Hill v. Berkley (1811) 18 Ves. Jun. 56 . . . . . . . 12·022 --v. Heatherfield Trustil942] 2K.B.1; 111 L.J.K.B. 465; 166 L.T. 251;58T.LR.
--v. South Staffordshire Railway Co. (1865) 110 12 L.T. Rep. 63 Chancery Ct. of 274; 86 S.J. 174; [1942] 1 All E.R. 404 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14·016, 14·017
Appeal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7·063, 7·076, 7·077 Home Office v. Dorset Yacht Co. Ltd. [1970] A.C. 1004; [1970] 2 W.L.R. 1140;
Hill and Hill v. Waxberg (A.E.) (1956) 2 Build. L.R. 107, U.S.C.A.. . . 1·265, 1 ·266, 3·076 [1970] 2 All E.R. 294; (1970] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 453; (33 M.L.R. 691];sub nom.
Hill (Edwin) & Partners v. Leakcliffe Properties (1984) 272E.G. 63, 179; (1984) 134 Dorset Yacht Co. v. Home Office, 114 S.J. 375, H.L.; affirming sub nom.
New L.J. 788; (1984) 29 Build. L.R. 43, D.C .................... 2·049, 2·262 Dorset Yacht Co. v. Home Office [1969J 2 Q.B. 412; [1969] 2 W.L.R. 1008;
Hill (J.M.) & Sons v. London Borough of Camden, 18 Build. L.R. 31, C.A.. . . . . . 4·222, [1969] Z All E.R. 546; 113 S.J. 227, C.A.; affirming 113 S.J. 57; [1968] C.L.Y.
12·004, 12-040, 12·041, 12·043, 12-058 2638 ....... . 1·279
Hill (William) Organisation v. Sunley & Sons (1983) 22 Build. L.R. 1 C.A ........ 1·300, Homeguard Products (N.Z.) Ltd. v. Kiwi Packaging Ltd. [1981] 2 N.Z.L.R. 322 .. 1·076
1·326, 2·195, 4·295, 13·043 Honeywill and Stein v. Larkin [1934] 1 K.B. 91 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·387
Hillas & Co. Ltd. v. Arcos Ltd. (1932) 147 L.T. 503; [1932] All E.R. Rep. 494; 38 Hong Kong Teakwood Works Ltd. v. Shui On Construction Co. Ltd. [1984]
Com. Cas. 23,H.L.. 1·043, 1·046 H.K.L.R. 235 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13·116
Hills v. Sughrue (1846) 15 M. & W. 253; 71 R.R. 651. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·233, 4·245 Hood v. Shaw (1960) 176 E.G.1291 . . . . . . . . 2·206
Hipkins v. Jack Cotton Partnership [1989] 45 E.G. 163. . . . . . 2·210 Hoole U.D.C. v. Fidelity and Deposit Co. of Maryland [1916] 2 K.B. 568 . . . . . . 17·053
Hippisley v. Knee Brothers [1905] 1 K.B. 1; 74 L.J.K.B. 68; 92 L.T. 20; Hooper Bailie v. President M.B.A. (1988) 8 A.C.L.R. 83. . 18·022, lS.077, 18· 136
21 T.L.R. 5. ........... ........... . ...... 2·285, 13.093 Hopkins v. Thompson (1867) 3 L.C.L.J. 36, (Canada) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-251
Hirji Mulji v. Cheong Yue Steamship Co. Ltd. [1926] A.C. 497 4·236 Hopper, Re (1867) L.R. 2 Q.B. 367; 36 L.J.Q.B. 97; 8 B. & S. 180; 15 L.T. 66; 15 W.R.
Hirst v. Picture Theatres Ltd. [1915] 1 K.B. 1 C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12·089 443. . . . . . . . . . ....... 18·022, 18·066, 18·071, 18,128
Hirt v. Hahn (1876) 61 Mo. (20 Post) 496; U.S. Dig. (1876), p. 131 . . . . . . . . . . 8·124 Hornibrook (M.R.) (Pty.) v. Newham (Eric) (Walleraurang) Pty. (1971) 45
Hiscox v. Outhwaite (No. 1) [1992] 1 A.C. 562; [1991] 3 W.L.R. 297; (1991] 3 All A.L.J.R 523, Australian High Ct.............. 1·111, 1•125, 1·259, 1·270, 3-061
E.R. 641; [1991] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 435; The Times, July 29, 1991; Financial Hortico (Australia) Pty. Ltd. v. Energy Equipment (Australia) Pty. Ltd. [1985] 1
Times, July 31, 1991, The lndependent,July 31, 1991, H.L.; affirming [1991] 2 N.S.W.L.R. 545.... . . . . . . . . . . . 17·055, 17,062, 17·075
W.L.R. 1321 [1991] 3 All E.R.124; [1991] 2 Lloyd's Rep 1; The Times, March Horton v. Tobin (1887) 20 Nov. Sc. R (8 R. & G.) 169; 8 C.L.T. 377 . . . . . . . . . 10·058
19, 1991, C.A.; affirming The Times, March 7, 1991; The Independent, March Hosier &Dickinson v. P.M. Kaye; Same v. Same [1970] 1 W.L.R.1611; [1971] 1 All
12, 1991; Financial Times, March 15, 1991. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·171 E.R. 301; 114 S.J. 929, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·194, 1·220, 1·231
Hitchins (Hatfield) v. Prudential Assurance Co. [1991] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 580; (1991) Hoskins v. Woodham [1938] 1 All E.R. 692 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·105
Financial Times, April 17, 1991, C.A..... . . . . ..... 1·224, 15·033 Botham v. East India Co. (1787) 1 T.R. 638; 1 R.R.333 ...... 4·136, 6-096, 6·114, 6·115,
Hoare & Co. v. McAlpine (1923] 1 Ch. 167; [1922] All E.R. Rep. 759; 92L.J.Ch. 81; 7·098
128 L.T. 526; 39 T.L.R. 97; 67 S.J. 146. . . . . . . 1·315, 1·338 Hounslow London Borough Council v. Twickenham Garden Developments [1971]
Hobbs v. Turner (1902) 18 T.L.R. 235 . . . . . . . . . . 13·033, 13·035, 13·036, 13·039, 13·088, Ch. 233; [1970] 3 W.L.R. 538; 114 S.J. 603; 69 L.G.R. 109;sub nom. London
13·072, 13·124 Borough of Hounslow v. Twickenham Garden Developments [1970] 3 All
Hochester v. De la Tour (1853) 2 E. & B. 678; 17 Jur.(o.s.) 972; 22L.J.Q.B. 455; 95 E.R. 326. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·145, 4·305, 12·001, 12-036, 12·078. 12·084, 12-090,
R.R. 747 ......................... 4·206 12·092, 12·094, 12·096
Hoenig v. Isaacs [1952] 1 T.L.R. 1360; (1952] 2 AU E.R. 176; C.A.. . . . . . . . 4·012, 4·015, Hovenden & Sons v. Millhoff (1900) 83 L.T. 41; 16 T.L.R. 506 . . . . . . . . . . . 2·233
4-017, 4·018, 4·019, 4·020, 4·021, Howard de Walden Estates v. Costain Management Design 55 B.L.R. 124; 26 Con.
4·022, 4·030, 5·003, 8· 118 LR. 141 . . . . . . . . . 7·029
Hoffman v. Meyer 1956 (2) S.A. 752 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·218 Howard Marine and Dredging Co. Ltd. v. Ogden (A.) & Sons (Excavations) Ltd.
Hohenzollern Actien-Gesellschaft fiir Locomotivbahn v. City of London Contract [1978] Q.B. 574; [1978] 2 W.L.R. 515; [1978] 2 All E.R. 1134; (1977) 122 S.J.
Corporation (1886) (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 100; 54 L.T. 596; 2 T.L.R. 470, ., .... 6·009, 48; [1978] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 334; (1977) 9 Build. L.R. 34, C.A......... 1·034, 1·130,
6·068, 6·091i 6·095;·6·153, 18·073 1·132, 1·135, 1·136, 1·139, 1·154, 1·173,
Holden v. Webber (1860) 29 Beav. 117; 131 R.R. 482. 2·235 1·174, 1·176, 1·212, 1·214, 1·242, 4·143
 .·~

lxxvi TABLE OF CASES lxxvii

TABLE OF CASES

Howatson v. Webb (1908) 1 Ch. 7; 77 L.J.Ch. 32; 97 L.T. 730; 52 S.J. 11, C.A.; affirm- Iezzi Constructions Ltd. v. Currumbin Crest Developments Ltd. (1994) 13
ing [1907] 1 Ch. 537 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·101 A.C.L.R. 39, Qd. C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12·005, 12·025, 12·083, 13·114
Howden v. Powell Duffryn Steam Coal Co., 1912 S.C. 920;49 Sc. L.R. 605 . . . . . . . 6·044, Imodco v. Wimpey Major Projects and Taylor Woodrow International 40 BLR 1,
6·045, 6·068, 6·091, 18·050, 18·052 C.A.. .......... .......... . ... 18·091, 18·167
Howe Richardson Scale Co. v. Polimex-CeKop [1978] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 161 Imperial Leatherware v. Macris Marcellino (1991) 22 N.S.W.L.R. 6538·211, 18·1598,
C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,057, 17·060, 17·063 18·1590
Howell v. Falmouth Boat Construction Co. [1951] A.C. 837; [1951] 2 T.L.R. 151; 95 Imperial Glass Ltd. v. Consolidated Supplies Ltd. (1960) 22 D.L.R. (2d) 759; [23
S.J. 413; [1951] 2All E.R. 278;sub nom. Falmouth Boat Construction Co. v. M.L.R. 691J, C.A. (Brit. Colum.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . _1·095, 1·097, 1·104, 1·108, 1·117
Howell [1951] 2 Lloyd's Ree. 45, H.L.; affirming sub nom. Falmouth Boat 'i;, Independent Broadcasting Authority v. E.M.I. Electromcs and B.I.C.~. Con-
Construction Co. v. Howell L1950] 2 K.B. 16;66 T.L.R. (Pt.1) 487; [1950] 1 struction (1980) 14 Build. L.R. 1, H.L.; affirming (1978) 11 Budd. L.R.
All E.R. 538; 83 LLL.Rep. 320, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·277 29 CA.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·142, 1·154, 1·214, 1·287, 1·291, 1·292,
Hsin Chong Construction Co. v. Ya ton Realty Co. (1986) 40 B.L.R. 119; High Ct. of ' . .... 2·092, 2·104, 2·105, 3·028, 4·073, 4·079, 4·080, 4·092, 4-094,
Hong Kong. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·080, 8·084, 16·018, 16'058 4·097, 4·098, 4· 108, 4·109, 4· 122, 13·008, 13·021, 13·029, 13·045
Hugall v. McLean (1884) 53 L.T. 94; 33 W.R. 588; 1 T.L.R. 445 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5·051 Industrial Overload Ltd. v. McWatters (1972) 24 D.L.R. (3d) 231, Saskatchewan
Hughes v. Architects' Registration Council of the United Kingdom [1957] 2 Q.B. Q.B. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·255
550; [1957J 3 W.L.R. 119; 101 S.J. 517; [1957] 2 All E.R. 436, D.C......... 2·013, Inforex v. U.S. 216 Ct. C. (1978) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . · · · ... · · · · · 7·050
2·014,2-015 Institution of Civil Engineers v. IRC [1932] 1 K.B. 149; 100 L.J.K.B. 705; 145 L.T.
--v. Lenny (1839) 5 M. & W. 183; 2Horn. &H.13; 8L.J.Ex.177. . . . . . . 2·270,2·271 533; 47 T.L.R. 466; 16 T.C. 158 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . · · · . 2·018
--v. Metropolitan Railway (1877) 2 App. Cas. 439; [1874--80] All E.R. Rep. 187; Interfoto Picture Library Ltd. v. Stiletto Visual Programmes Ltd. [1989] 1 Q.B. 433;
46 L.!-Q.B. 583; 36 L.T. 932; 25 W.R 680, H.L.. . . . . . . . . . . . 1·256, 1·258, 7·097 [1988] 2 W.L.R. 615; [1988] 1 All E.R. 348; (1988) 7 Tr. L.R. 187, C.A. . . . 1·197
--v.PerCival(1883)8App.Cas.443 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·389 International Paper Co. v. Corporex Constructions Inc. 385 S.E. 2nd 553; (1990),
--v. Pump House Hotel Co. [1902] 2 K.B.190; 71 L.J.K.B. 630; 86 LT. 794; 50 N.C. App. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15·054
W.R. 660; 18 T.L.R. 654. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -. . . . . . . . . . 14·013, 14-015 International Tank and Pipe S.A.K. v. Kuwait A via ti on Fuelling Co. K.S.C. [1975]
Hughes Brothers v. Telede Ltd. (1989) 8 A.C.L.R. 22............... 17·005, 17·075 Q.B. 224; [1974] 3 W.L.R 721; 118 S.J. 752; [1975] l All ER 242; [1975) 1
Hulton v. Hulton [1917] 1 K.B. 813; [1916-17] All E.R. Rep. 595; 86 L.J.K.B. 633; Lloyd's Rep. 8, C.A.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·057, 18·085
116 L.T. 551; 33 T.L.R. 197; 61 S.J. 268. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·148
Intraco v. NotisShippingCorp.ofLlberia;Bhoja Trader, The [1981] Cam. L.R.184;
Humber Oil Terminals Trustees v. Harbour and General Works (Stevin) (1991) 7
Const. L.J. 333, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·062, 8·067 [1"981]2Lloyd'sRep.25?,CA ... : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ·.· .. :.: ...... 17·072
- - v. Hersent Offshore (1982) 20 Build L.R. 16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·134, Investors in Industry Commercial Properties v. So~th Bedf?rdsh1r~ D1str1ct Coun-
8·065 cil· Eilison & Partners and Hamilton Associates (Third Parties) [1986] Q.B.
Humble v. Hunter (1848) 12 Q.B. 310; 17 L.J.Q.B. 350; 12 Jur. 1021; 76 R.R. 291 . 14·019 1034· [1986)2 W.L.R 937; [1986) 1 AUER 787 (1985)5 Con. LR 1; [1986] 1
Humphreyv.Dale(1875)7Ex.B.66 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·204 E.G.'L.R. 252; (1986) 2 Const. L.J. 108; (1985) 32 Build. L.R. 1; (1986) 83
Hungerford v._Walker (1989) 63 A.L.J.R. 210 [1990] 171 C.L.R. 125, High Ct. of L.S.Gaz. 441 (1986) 136 New L.J. 118; C.A. . . . . . . . . . . 1·350, 2·076, 2·093, 2·151
Australia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·093, 8·095, 8·096, 8·097 Ireland v. Livingstone (1871) L.R. 5 H.L. 395; 41 L.J.Q.B. 201; 37 L.T. 79 . . 2·095
Hunkin Conkey Construction v. U.S. (1972) 461 Fed. Rep. (2d) 1270 . . . . . . . . . 7.045 Irvine,Re(l928)3DL.R.268;620L.R.319......................... 1·031
Hunt v. Bishop (1853) 8 Ex. 675; 22L.J.Ex. 337; 21 L.T.(o.s.) 92; 91 R.R. 689 . . . 4·197 ItekCorror~tion v.FirstNational Bank of Boston 730F.2d.19 (1984) U.S. C.A. lst
--v. South Eastern Ry. (1875) 45 L.J.Q.B. 87. . . . . . 4·232, 4·243, 4·244 Circuit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17·069
Hunter v. Bradford Property Trust Ltd. 1970 S.L.T. 173 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·072 Ives (E.R.) Investment v. High [1967] 2 Q.B. 379; [1967} 2 W.L.R 789;sub nom. Ives
- - v. Fitzroy Robinson and Partners [1978] F.S.R. 167; (1977) 10 Build. (E.R.) Investments v. High [1967] 1 Al!E.R. 504; llOS.J. 963; [1966] C.L.Y.
L.R. 84 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . 2·275, 2·276, 2-279 6674; [31 Conv. 214; 30 M.L.R. 580], C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . · · · . . 1·256
- - v. Hanley 1955 S.L.T. 213 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·087
Hussey v. Eels [1990] 2 Q.B. 227; [1990] 2 W.L.R. 234; [1990J 1 AIIE.R. 449; [1990]
19 E.G. 77; (1990) 140 New L.J. 53, C.A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S.154, 8·155, 8·227 JMJ Contractors v. Marples Ridgeway (1985) 31 Build. L.R. 100 . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·086
Hutchinson v. Harris (1978) 10 Build. L.R. 19, C.A.. . . . . . . . . 2·116, 2·159, 4·017, 8·161
Jackson v. Barry Railway [1893] 1 Ch. 238; 9 T.L.R. 90; 68 L.T. 472; 2 R. 207. . . . . 6·135,
Hutton v. Warren (1836) 1 M. & W. 466; 5 L.J.Ex. 234; Tyr. & Cr. 646;2 Gale 71;46 6·137, 6· 138, 6· 143, fr 221, 18·130
R.R. 368 . . . . . . . . . . ........... ..... .. .. .... 1·204
Hyde v. Wrench (1840) 3 Beav. 334; 4 Jur. 1106; 49 E.R. 132. . . . . . . . . . . . 1·028, 1·029
--v. Eastbourne Local Board (1886), (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 81. . . . . 4-047, 4·143, 4-252
Hydraulic Co. v. Spencer (1886) 2 T.L.R. 554 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·1i2 - v . Goldsmith (1950) 81 C.L.R. 446 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . · ... · · · · . . 1·250
Hydraulic Engineering Co. v. McHaffie (1878) 4 Q.B.D. 670; 27 W.R. 221. .. 9·025, 9.028 --v. Horizon Holidays [1975] 1 W.L.R. 1468; 119 S.J. 759; [1975] 3 All E.R. 92,
Hydrocarbons Great Britain v. Cammell Laird Shipbuilders and Automotive C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......... 8·160
Products (t/a Ap Precision Hydraulics); Redman Broughton- Blackclawson Jackson Stansfield & Sons v. Butterworth [1948J W.N. 315; 64 T.L.R. 481; 112 J.P.
International 53 BLR 84, C.A.; reversing 25 Con. L.R. 131. : . . . . . 14·026, 14-036 377; 92 S.J. 469; [1948] 2 All E.R. 558; 46 L.G.R. 410; C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . 4·277
Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. v. Papadopoulos [1980] 1 W.L.R. 1129; (1980) 124 Jacob and Youngs Inc. v. Kent 121 NE. 889 (1921) . . . . . . . . . 4·020,4·022, 7·002, 12·022,

I
13·069, 13·085, 13·088
S.J. 592 [1980] 2 All E.R. 29; [1980J 2 Lloyd's Rep. 1, H.L.; affirming [1979] 1
Lloyd's Rep. 130, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·007, 4·025, 4-228, 4·229, 12·022, Jacobowicz v Wicks [1956] Cnm.L.R. 697, DC. . . . . . . . . . . . 2-012
12·060, 17·011C, 17·014, 17·015 Jacobs v. City ofRegma 1964 S.C.R. 326 (Canada) . . . . . ......... 1·104
Jadis v. Porte (1915) 8 W.W.R. 768; (1915) 31 W.L.R. 234, (Canada) . . . . . . l ·115
l Jaeger's Sanitary Woollen System Co Ltd. v. Walker (1897) 77 LT. 180 14·002
James v. Kent (Thomas) & Co. [1951] 1 K.B. 551; [1951] 1 T.L.R. 552; 95 S.J. 29;
ICI pie. v. Bovis Construction (1992) 8 Const. L.J. 293. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·207, 8·209 [1950] 2AIIER.1099,CA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . · · · 1·270,8·104
I.F. Contractors v. Lloyds Bank and Rafidain Bank [1990] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 496; 51 James McNaughton Paper Group Ltd. v. Hicks Anderson & Co. [1991] 2 Q.B. 113;
BLR 1; Financial Times,July 171990, C.A., reversing in part [1989] 2 Lloyd's [1991] 2 W.L.R 641; [1991 J1 AIIE.R 134; [1990] B.C.C. 891; [1991] B.C.L.C.
Rep. 205 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17·006, 17·056, 17·060, 17·066 235; (1990) 140 New LJ. 1311; The Independent, September 11, 1990,
IMI Cornelius (U.K.) Ltd. v.Bloor [1991J 57 BLR 108 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . .-, . 8·155 C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·282,1·289
Ibmac Ltd. v. Marshall (Haines) 1968) 208 E.G. 851, C.A. . . . . 4·007,-"4·009, 4-4)13, James Png Construction v. Tsu Chin Kwan Peter [1991] 1 M.L.J. 499 . . . . . . . 6·166
4·014, 4·019, 4·143 James Pty. Ltd. v. Dullcan [1970) V.R. 705........... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·377
 lx:xviii TABLE OF CASES TABLE OF CASES lxxix

James Moore v. University of Ottawa (1978) 85 D.L.R. (3d) 186 2·062 Jordeson v. Sutton Southcoates and Drypool Gas Co. [1899] 2 Ch. 217. . . . . . . . 1·344
Jameson v. Simon (1899) 1 F. (Ct. of Sess.) 1211; 7 S.L.T. 133. . . . . . . . . . . . Z.183, 2·189 Joscelyne v. Nissen [1970] 2 Q.B. 86; [1970] 2 W.L.R. 509; [1970] 1 All E.R.1213;
Jamieson v. Mcinnes (1887) 15 R. (Ct. of Sess.) 17; 25 Sc. L.R. 32. . . . . . . . . 8-020, 8-049 (1969) 114 SJ. 55; [86 L.Q.R. 303; 34 Conv. 200], C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·110
Jardine Engineering Corporation v. Shimizu Corporation (1992) 63 BLR 96, Hong Joseph Constantine Steamship Line Ltd. v. Imperial Smelting Corporation Ltd.
Kong H.C. . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 13·104 [1942] A.C. 154; 110 L.J.K.B. 433; 165 L.T. 27; 46 Com. Cas. 258; 57 T.L.R.
Jartay Developments. Re (1983) 22 Build. L.R. 134. . . . . . . .. 8·085, 16·057 485; 70 Ll.L.Rep. 1; [1941] 2 All E.R. 165 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·249
Jarvis v. May, Davies [1936] 1 K.B. 399 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·372 Joshua Henshaw & Sons v. Rochdale Corp. [1944] K.B. 381; 113 L.J.K.B. 278; 170
Jarvis v. Swan Tours [1973] 1 Q.B. 233; [1972] 3 W.L.R. 954; 116 S.J. 822; [1973] 1 All L.T. 214; [1944] 1 All E.R. 413. . . . . . . . . . . . 9·008, 9·017, 12·011, 12.(149, 12·051
E.R. 71, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·160 Jowett v. Neath Rural District Council (1916) 80 J.P.L. 207. . . . . . . . . . . . 18·068, 18·069
Jarvis (Jo~n) v. Rockdale Housing Association (1987) 3 Const. L.J. 24; (1987) 36 Junior Books v. Veitchi Co., The [1983] A.C. 520; [1982] 3 W.L.R. 477; (1982) 126
Build. L.R. 48; (1986) 10 Con. L.R. 51, C.A. affirming (1985) 5 Con. S.J. 538; [1982] 3 AllE.R. 201; [1982] Com. LR. 221; (1982) 79 L.S.Gaz.1413;
L.R. 118. . . . . . . . . . . . 1·220, 1·221, 1·231, 2·145, 2·168, 2·170, (1981) 21 Build. L.R. 66, H.L....... 1·292, 1·292A, 1·309, 13·044, 13·045, 13·054,
4·122, 5·036, 7·007, 7-033, 12-005, 12·019, 13·059
. ]2.020, 12·023, 12-028, 12·046, 13·008, 15-060
Jarvis (J.) & Sons Ltd. v. Westminster City Council. See Westminster Corporation
KBH Construction Ltd. v. PSD Development (1990) 21 N.S.W.L.R. 348.... 6·063, 6-075,
v. Jarvis (J.) & Sons Ltd.
. 8·084, 10.069
Jay,ex parte.,re Harrison (1880) 14 Ch.D. 19;42 L.T. 600; 28 W.R. 449;44J.P. 409;
K/S AJS Bani v. Korea Shipbuilding and Engineering Corporation [1987] 2F.T.L.R.
49 L.J.B.K. 47 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16-037, 16-039, 16·041
Jeavans Re, ex pa rte MacKay, ex parte Brown (1873) 8 Ch.App. 643; 42 L.J. Bey. 68; 373; [1987] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 445, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·082A
28 L.T. 828; 37 J.P. 644; 21 W.R. 664, L.JJ. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·081
K!S Norjarl A/S v. Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. [1992] 1 Q.B. 863; [1991] 3 W L.R.
Jenkins v. Betham (1855) 15 C.B. 168; 24 L.J.C.P. 94; 1 Jur. 237; 3 H.L.R. 373; 24 1025; [1991] 3 All E.R. 211; [1991] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 524; (1991] E.G.C.S. 20;
L.T.(o.s.) 78, 116, 260, 270. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·155, 2·204 (1991) 141 New L.J. 343; The Independent, February 22, 1991; The Times,
Jennie 0-foods v. U.S. 580 F. (2d) 400 (1978) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.237 March 12, 1991, The Times, March 5, 1991, C.A.; affinning [1991] 1 Lloyd's
Jennings v. Brighton Sewers Board (1872) 4 De G.J. & S. 735 n. . . . . . . . . . . . . 12·084 Rep. 260; The Times, November 8, 1990 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·156
- v . Tavener [1955] 1 W.L.R. 932; 99 S.J. 543; [1955] 2 All E.R. 769..... 4·078, 4·087, Kaliszewska v. Clague (J.) and Partners [1984] C.I.L.L.131; (1984) Const. L.J. 137;
(1984) 5 Con. L.R 62........ 2·109, 2·222
4-105
Jennings Construction Ltd. v. Birt (Q.M.) Ltd. [1987] 8 N.S.W.L.R. 18. .... 4·132, 4·134, Kamlee Construction v. Oakville (Town of) (1961) 26 D.L.R. (2d) 166..... 4-214,4-223
Kamloops (The City of) v. Nielsen, Hughes and Hughes (1984) 10 D.L.R. (4th) 64;
4·135, 18·056
Jepson (H.N.) & Partners v. Severn Trent Water Authority (1982) 20Build. L.R. 53, [1984] 5 W.W.R.1; (1984) 1 Const. L.J. 207, Supreme Ct. of Canada.. 1·349, 1·351,
C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Z.252 1·359, 2·084, 2·222, 4·288
Jeune v.Queen's Cross Properties [1974] 1 Ch. 97; [1973)3 W.L.R.378; 117S.J. 680; Kathmer Investments v. Woolworth [1970] 2 S.A. 498. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-100, 18·101
[1973] 3 All E.R. 97; 26 P. & C.R. 98. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·300, 4·301, 4·302, 4.304 Kaye (Sidney), Finnin (Eric) & Partners v. Bronesky (1973) 4 Build. L.R. 1,
John Manyon International Ltd. v. New Brunswick Telephone Co. (1982) 141 C.A.. . ..... 2·042, 2·245,
D.L.R. (3d) 193, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·373 3·050, 18·032, 18·033
Johns & Son v. Webster & Tonks [1916] N.Z.L.R. 1020... 5·053, 6·063, 6·070, 6·082, 6·093 - - v. Waghorn (1809) 1 Taunt. 428; 127 E.R. 900 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·090
Johns, Worrell v. Johns Re, [1928] Ch. 737 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13·126, 16·045, 16·046 Kaye (P.&M.) v. Hosier&Dickinson [1972] 1 W.L.R 146; (1971) 116S.J. 75; [1972)
Johnson v. Agnew [1980] A.C. 367; [1979] 2 W.L.R. 487; [1979] 1 All E.R. 883; 1 AllE.R.121,H.L.;affirming[l970J 1 W.L.R.1611; 114S.J. 929; [1971] 1 All
(1979) 123 SJ. 217; (1979) 38 P. & C.R. 424; (1979) 251 E.G. 1167, H.L.; E.R. 301, C.A.. . . . . . . 4·293, 5·021, 5·027, 5·042, 5·043, 5·049, 5·050, 6·017, 6·074,
affirming [1978] Ch. 176; [1978} 2 W.L.R. 806; [1978] 3 All E.R. 314; (1977) . 6-076, 6·085, 18·002
122 S.J. 230; (1977) 38 P. & C.R. 107, C.A. [96 LQ.R. 403] . . . . . . . . . . . 1·143 Kealey v. Heard [1983] 1 W.L.R. 573; [1983] 1 All E.R. 973; [1983] I.C.R. 484 ..... 1·320,
- v . Raylton (1881) 7 Q.B.D. 438; 50 L.J.Q.B. 753; 45 L.T. 374; 30 W.R. 350 . . 14·008 1·336
- - v. Shrewsbury and Birmingham Railway (1853) 3 De G.M. & G. 914; 22 Kearley v. Thomson (1890) 24 Q.B.D. 742; 59 L.J .Q.B. 288;63 L.T.150;38 W.R. 614;
L.J.Ch. 921; 17 Jur. 1015; 98 R.R. 360. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·298 54 J.P. 804; 6 T.L.R. 267. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·276
--v. Weston (1859) 1 F. & F. 693; 115 R.R. 964 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7·074 Kearney v. Waller (Eric) Ltd. [1967] 1 Q.B. 29; [1966) 2 W.L.R. 208; [1965] 3 All
Johnston v. Boyes [1899] 2 Ch. 73; 68 LJ.Ch.425; 80 L.T.488; 47 W.R. 517; 43 S.J. E.R. 352; 110 S.J. 13 . . . . . . . ..... 1·334
457 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·020, 1·022 Keates v. Lord Cadogan (1851) 10 C.B. 591; 20 L.J.C.P. 76; 16 L.T.( o.s.) 367; 15 Jur.
Johnathan Cape Ltd. v. Consolidated Press Ltd. [1954] 1 W.L.R. 1313; 98 S.J. 750; 428;138E.R.234.............. . ................. 1·145
[1954]3 All E.R. 253 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·281 Keen and Keen, Re, exparte Collins [1902] 1 K.B.555; 71 LJK.B.487;86L.T.235;
Jones,Re,exparte Nichols (1883)22 Ch.D. 782; 52L.J.Ch. 635;48L.T.492; 31 W.R. 50 W.R. 334; 9 Hanson 145. . . . . . . . 11·027, 11·028, 11·032, 11·036, 11·037, 11·049,
661. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·081, 14·044, 16·061, 16·062, 16·063 11 ·050, 16-043, 16·053
Jones v. Cannock (1850) 5 Ex. 713; 19 L.J.Ex. 371; 82 R.R. 850. . . . . . . . . . . 4·197, 5·023 Kellett v. Mayor of Stockport (1906) 70J.P. 154. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-198, 6·173, 6-180
--v. Hiser Construction (1984) 484 A. (2d) 302, CA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·286, 4-131 --v. New Mills Urban District Council (1900), (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 298. ... 6·096, 6-129,
- v . North (1875) L.R. 19 Eq. 426; 44 L.J.Ch. 388; 32 L.T. 149; 23 W.R. 68 3·080 6-145, 6·147
- v . R. (1877) 7 Can. S.C. (Duval) 570. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-019 Kelly (C.T.R.) & Partners v. Nortbshore Development Co. Ltd. (1963) 5 W.I.R.
- - v. St. John's College, Oxford (1870) L.R. 6 Q.B. 115; 40 L.J.Q.B. 80; 23 L.T. 379. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·064, 1-271, 2·237, 2·245, 2·259, 2·.268,Z.284
803; 19 W.R. 276. . . . . . . . 4·041, 4-245, 4·246, 6-038, 10.031, 10·032, 10·041, 10·072 Kelsen v. Imperial Tobacco Co. ( of Great Britain and Ireland) [1957] 2 Q.B. 334;
- - v. Stroud District Council [1986] 1 W.LR. 1141; (1986) 130 S.J. 469; [1988] 1 [1957] 2 W.LR. 1007; [1957] 2 All E.R. 343; 101 S.J. 446; [101 S.J. 528, 638; 20
All E.R. 5; (1986) 84 L.G.R. 886; (1986) 279 E.G. 213; (1986) 2 Const. L.J. M.L.R. 499; 21 Conv. 312]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·341, 1·342
185; (1986) 34 Build. L.R. 27; (1987) 8 Con. L.R.23; [1986]2 E.G.L.R. 133, Kemble v. Farren (1829) 6 Bing. 141; 3M. & P. 425; 7 L.J.(o.s.) C.P. 258; 3 C. & P.
C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·227 623; 31 R.R. 366. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10·006, 10·007
Jones & Lyttle v. Mackie (1918) 2 W.W.R. 82 (Canada) . . . . . . . . . . . 8·075, 8·173, 8-174 Kemp v. Baereselman [1906] 2 K.B. 604; 75 L.J.K.B. 873 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,020
Joo Yee Construction Proprietary (In liquidation) v. Diethelm Industries - v . Rose (1858) 1 Gift. 258;32 L.T.(o.s.) 51 ;221 .P. 721;4Jur.(N .s.) 919; 114 R.R.
Proprietary (1991) 7 Const. L.J. 53, High Ct. of Singapore. . . . . . . . ;· ._8·079, 8·080, 429... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·102, 6·140, 18·129
8·082, 8·083, 8·086, 13·126, lf127, 14·045, Kempster v. Bank of Montreal (1871) 32 U.C.Q.B. 87 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·146
16·031, 16-045, 16-054, 16·055, 16·056, 16-057 Kencor Holding Ltd. v. Government of Saskatchewan [1991] 1 W.W.R. 717 . . . 3·053
 lxxx TABLE OF CASES
TABLE OF CASES lxxxi
Kendall (Henry) & Sons (A Firm) v. Llllico (William) & Sons; Holland Colombo
Kingston-upon-Hull Guardians v. Petch (1854) 10 Ex. 610; 24 L.J.Ex. 23; 102 R.R. _
Trading Society v. Grimsdale & Sons; Grimsdale & Sons v. Suffolk Agricul-
tural Poultry Producers' Association [1969] 2 A.C. 31; [1968] 3 W.L.R. 110;
sub nom. Kendall (Henry) & Sons (A Finn) v. Lillico (William) & Sons;
Holland Colombo Trading Society v. Grimsdale & Sons (Consolidated
Kiriri J;~o~·c~..Ltd.' v·. i)~~·;a~i [19601 ·A.~.
i9i)i9·~~ 2!· ~·~
E.R.177; 104 S.J. 49, [23 M.L.R. 322, 104 · · ' 1 1
-~:t~~;~11i~.~~ 1~
3 057
.
1 270
7·063 7·064
Appeals); Grimsdale & Sons v. Suffolk Agricultural and Poultry Producers' Kirk v. Bromley Union (1848) 17 L.J.Ch. 127. · · · · · · ············· ]J,o
Association, 112S.J. 562; Kendall (Henry) & Sons (A Firm) v. Lillico (Wil- Kirk & Kirk v. Croydon Corporation [1956] J.P.L. 585. 4·179, 7,028, 7·074' 13·040
17
liam) & Sons;. Holland Colombo Trading Society v. Grimsdale & Sons;
Grimsdale & Sons v. Suffolk Agricultural and Poultry Producers' Associ-
ation [1968) 2 All E.R. 444; sub nom. Hardwick Game Farm v. Suffolk Agri-
Kirkwood v. Morrison (1877) 5 R (Ct. ofSess.) 79 .. 5.Qi6 ·6:o·o9. (i.()68·, 6:o?9:6··i64,
Kirsch v. Brady (1937) 58 C.L.R. 36. · · · · · · · · · · · ' '
~:!:
17·012
cultural and Poultry Producers' Association; Lillico (William) (First Third Kitchen Re (1881) 17 Ch.D. 668 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·: · · · ·] ..
--v. Royal Air Force Association [1958] 1 W.L.R. 563; 102 SJ. 363, {1958 3
A1i .
Party); Grimsdale & Sons (Second Third Party); Kendall (Henry) & Sons
(First Fourth Party); Holland-Colombo Trading Society (Second Fourth ER 241; [1958S.L.T.177], C.A........ · · · · · · · · · · · ·: · · · · ·. · · · · 4 294
Party) [1968} 1 Lloyd's Rep. 547; H.L; affirming sub nom. Hardwick Game Kitsons Sheet Metal Ltd. v. Matthew Hall Mechanical and Ele~.7~1 !:r:~nr::o. 13·134
Farm v. Suffolk Agricultural and Poultry Producers' Association (William (1989) 47BLR 82.. · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ' ' 12·015
Lillico & Son, Grimsdale & Sons, Third parties; and Henry Kendall & Sons Klein v. U.S. 285 F. 2nd 778 (1961) ......... : · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · :
(A Finn) and Holland Colombo, Fourth parties) [1966] 1 W.L.R. 287; 110 Kleinwort Benson v Malaysia Mining Corporation Berhad {1989] 1 W.L.R. 379,
S.J.11; [1966] 1 AJIE.R.309; [1966] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 197 C.A.affirminginpart [1989] 1 All E.R. 785; (1989) 133 SJ. 262; [1989] 1 Lloyd.s Rep. 556; (1989)
[1964] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 227. . . . . . . . . . 4·068, 4·069, 4·094, 4·117 139 New LJ 221; [1989J L.S.Gaz., April 26, 35, C.A. . . . . . . . · · · · · · · · 1·082
Kenlee Lands Inc. v. Northumberland Construction Ltd. (1973) 36 D.L.R. (3d)
270 . . . ..... 4·266
Knight v. Burgess (i864) 33 LJ.Ch. 727; lOJur. 166; 10 L.T. 9~~~.~f():g,3i(i.()Q : 2
4 1
(j~fg
Kennedy v. Barrow-in-Furness (Mayor of) (1909), (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 411. .. 6·065, 6·220, Kallberg v. Capetown Municipality 1967 (3) S.A. 472....... 6-121, .6·124, 18:047, 18·063
18·067, 18· 105 Kong Wah Housing Developments Sdn. Bhd. v. Desplan Constructmn Tradmg .
- - v. Collings Construction [1991] 7B + Ch. 25 ... Sdn. Bhd. [1991] 2 M.LJ.117 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i8 i58 12 096
18166
12·044
- - v. Thomassen [1929] 1 Ch. 426; 98 L.J.Ch. 98; 140 L.T. 215; 45 T.L.R. 122; Kontek v Daveyduke Industnes (1987) 6 A.C.LR.. · · · · · · · · · · · S· ·848 b '
[1928] All E.R. Rep. 524 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·031 Koufos v .Czarnikow (C.) [1%9] 1 A.C. 350; {1967] 3 W.L.R.1491; 111 J. ,su
Kenney v. Capper Pipe Services Co. (1967) 112 S.J. 47; sub nom. Kenney Copper n~m. Koufos v. Czarmkow (C.). Heron II, The [1967] 3 All E.R. 686; sub
Pipe Services Co. (1967) 117 New L.J. 1244. . . . . . . . . . . . 15,050, 15·053, 15·054 nom. Czarnikow (C.) v. [1967] 2Lloyd's Rep. 457, H.L ;affirming sub nom.
--v. Copper Pipe Services Co. See Kenney v. Capper Pipe Services Co. Czamikow (C.) v. Koufos [1966] 2 Q.B. 695; [1966] 2 W.L.R. 1397; [1966] 2
Kensington & Chelsea & Westminster Area Health Authority v. Wettem Com- All E.R. 593; [1966] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 595; [1966] C.L.Y. 11174, C.A. reversing ·l09
posites (1985) 31 Build. L.R. 57; [1985] 1 All E.R. 346; (1984) 134 New LJ. 110 S.J. 287; [1966] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 259 .......... · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 8
887, D.C.. . . . . . . 1·300, 1·351, 1·378, 2·024, 2·027, 2-122, 2·182, 2·184, 2-188,
KratzJ;nann Holdings Ltd. v. University of Quee~s~a.n~. ~1.9~~). ~li~~Jo~10%i1, 10·020
v~~~~at Ce~tr~i a;~ o,: ci870) L.R.· 5. Ex: 289; 39 L.J.Ex. 197; 23 L.T. 72; 18
2·189, 2·190, 2·195
Kent v. Saltdean Estate Co. (1964) 114 L.J. 555. . . . . . . . • . . . 4·087, 5·055, 5·056, 6·082 Krehl 16·042
Kenworthy and Queen Insurance Co., Re. (1893) 9 T.L.R. 181 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·132 W.R. 1035 · · . · · · · · · · · · · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,153
Kerr v. Dundee Gas Co. (1861) 23D. (Ct. ofSess.) 343.... 11·023, 11·025, 11·034, 11·036 Krestow v Wooster (1978) 360 So. (2d) 32 ... · . · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·
Ketteman v. Hansel Properties [1987] A.C. 189; [1987] 2 W.L.R. 312; [1988} 1 All Kruse v. Questier& Co. {1953] 1 Q.B. 669; [1953] 2 W.L.R. 850; 97 S.J.281; [1953] 1 18·007
E.R. 38; (1987) 131 S.J. 134; [1987] 1 F.T.L.R. 284; (1987) 85 L.G.R. 409;
All E.R. 954; [1953] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 310 ......... · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·
(1987) 36 Build. L.R. 1; [1987] 1 E.G.L.R. 237; (1987) 84 L.S.Gaz. 657; (1987)
137NewL.J.100; [(1987) 84 L.S.Gaz. 3562], H.L.;affirming [1984} 1 W.L.R.
1274; (1984) 128 S.J. 800; [1985] 1 All E.R. 352; (1985) 49 P. & C.R. 257;
(1985) 27 Build. L.R. 1; [1984] C.!.L.L. 109; (1984) 271 E.G. 1099; (1984) 81
L.R.E. Engineering v. Otto Simon Carves (1981), (1983) 24 Build. L.R. 127 · · · ·
Laburnam Construction v. U.S. (1963) 325 F. (2d) 451 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·
;!::
L.S.Gaz. 3018, C.A.......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·348 Lacey.(William) (Hounslow) Ltd. v. Davis [1957} 1 W.L.R. 932; [1957] 2 All E.R.
Kidd v. Mississauga Hydro-Electric Commission (1979) 97 D.L.R. (3d) 535, Ont. 712. lOl s J 629· [101 SJ. 755; 107 L.J. 723; 73 L.Q.R. 443; 21 Conv. O
H.C.J....... 1·286, 2·159. 4-130 396] ..... ·. ·... .' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·264, 1·266, 1·267, 1·27 , 2· 250
Kiewit (Peter), Sons' Co. of Canada v. Eakins Construction Ltd. (1960) 22 D.L.R.
(2d) 465; [1960] S.C.R. 361, Canada. . . . . 1·063, 1·264, 1·271, 2·252, 3·219, 4·219, Laidlaw v. Hasting Pier Co. (1874), (4th e~J ~ r 7~cfu°,
0 5
1 9
~:icii, i.(t.o:~~Q.~~~; io\1°-:i~·1t~~
Laing (John) Construction Ltd. v. County & District Properties [1983} Com. L.R. ,0
4·220, 6·146, 7·004, 7·060, 7·069, 7·070
Kimberley v. Dick (1871) L.R. 13 Eq. 1; 41 L.J.Ch. 38; 25 L.T. 476; 20 W.R. 49.... 6-103, 40· (1983) 23 Build. L.R. 1 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · . . . . . . . . . . . . :i 2 62
6·140, 8-018 Lakeman' v. Mountstephen (1874) L.R. 7 H.L. 17; 43 L.J.Q.B. 188; 30 L.T. 437; 2 17·017
King v. Allen (David) & Sons Bill Posting [1916] 2 A.C. 54; 85 L.J.P.C. 229; 114 L.T.
762 . . . . . . . . . . . . ·. · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·
- - v. Low (1901) 3 Ont. L.R. 234 ..... 4·206
4-253
Lakers Mechanical Services v. Boskalis Westmmster Constru~t~~~ .2~ ::.:3s,
W.R.617 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . · · · · · · · · ·.· · · · · · · · · · · ·. · · · · · · · · ·
l8·l20
- v . ThomasMcKenna [1991}2 Q.B. 480; [1991J2W.L.R.1234; [1991] 1 Al!E.R.
653; 54 BLR 48; The Times, January 30, 1991, C.A. . . . . . . 18·168, 18·178, 18·181,
Lambe~·~· ie~i~ ii9821· A:c:225; ii98ii:i W.L:R:
7i3; [i98ij i All E ..R. 1185;
[1981] Lloyd's Rep. 17;sub nom. Lexmead (Basingstoke) v. Lewis (1981)
18·184, 18-191, 18·195, 18·198 125 s J 310· [1981] RT R 346 H.L.· reversing [1980] 2 W.L.R. 299; [1980] 1
--v. Victor Parsons [1973] 1 W.L.R. 29, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·294, 4·295 AllE:R. 978; (1979) 124s.J.5o; [1980] R.T.R.15~; [1980} l Lloyd's.Rep. 311,
King's Motor (Oxford) Ltd. v. Lax [1970] 1 W.L.R. 426; [1969] 3 AIIE.R. 665; 114 c A · reversing in part sub nom. Lambert v. Lewis; Lexmead (Basmgstoke),
S.J. 168 ....... .
1·049 Third Party; Dixon~Bate (B.), Fourth Party {1979} R.T.R. 61; [19781 1 .
King's Norton Metal Company Ltd. v. Edridge Merrett & Co. Ltd.;Same v. Roberts 1 009
083
(1897) 14 T.L.R. 98, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·098 Lloyd's Rep. 610· (78 L.S.Gaz. 597] · · · · · · · · · · · · · · . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Lamberto v Spry (1977) (Unrep.) October 6, 1977, Sup. Ct., W.A .. · · · · · · · 1·249, 5•
Kingdom v. Cox (1848) 5 C.B. 522. 4-181, 9·003, 9·009, 9·020, 9·023 Laminated Structures v. Eastern Woodworkers (1962) 32 D.L.R. (2d) 1. · · · · .4·073, 4·089
Kingston-upon-Hull Corporation v. Harding [1892] 2 Q.B. 494; 62 L.J.Q.B. 55; 97
.~~i~~
9
L.T. 539; 41 W.R. 19; 36 S.J. 624; 4 R. 7. . . . . . . . 1·297, 2·140, 2·197, 5;.0~, 5·038, Lampr~ltvJ~~I~~~: .(~~ J.i?i,x6~~J, \~o~t.. ~.~5i~~.ti1~lo~:sJ.itl,·l618, 9·020
5-059, 6·109, 6·139, 7·031, 7·037, Landles; ;. Wilson (1880) 8 R. (a. ofSess. Cas.) 289; 18 Sc. L.R. 206. · · · · · ~~14,;~4;'6
17·010, 17·024, 17·028
 r
lxxxii TABLE OF CASES J TABLE OF CASES lxxxiii
Langbrook Properties Ltd. v. Surrey C.C. (1970] 1 W.L.R. 161; [1969] 3 All E.R.
1424; 113 S.J. 983; 68 L.G.R. 268; [34 Conv. 49] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Langley Fox Building Partnership v. De Valence [1991] S.A. 1, A.O. . 1·387
1·344 [ Lewisham London Borough Council v. Leslie & Co. (1978) 250 E.G. 1289; (1978) 12
Build. L.R. 22, C.A.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2· 195, 4·295
Leyland v. Panamena Europea (1943) 76 Lloyd's Rep. 113. . . . 6-097, 6·098, 6· 138, 6· 139,

!
Lapthorne v. St. Aubyn (1885) 1 C. & E. 486; 1 T.L.R. 279. . . . . . . . . 6-049, 7·065, 7·101
Lara v. Greely (1885) 20 Fla. 926, US. Dig. (1885) p. 119 . . J.2.069 6·148
Larkins v. Chel~er Holdings Pty. [1965] Qd R 68, (Australia)...... 1-164, 2·232, 6·111
Libra Shipping and Trading Corp. v. Northern Sales; Aspen Trader, The [1981] 1
18·057

i
Lashmar v. Ph1lhps & Cooper Ltd. (1960) Q.B.D., Special Paper (Unrep.) noted Lloyd's Rep. 273, C.A........... .
(10th ed.) p. 869 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·192 Lichter v. Mellon Stuart 305 F. (2d) 216 (1962) U.S. Ct. of App ........ . 8·203
Law v. British Local Board (1892) [1892] 1 Q.B. 127 ...... , . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.010 Liebe v. Molloy (1906) 4 C.L.R. 347 High Ct. Australia .... 7·073
- - v. Hodson (1809) 11 East 300; 2 Camp. 147; 10 R.R. 513 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-279 Lillicrap, Wassenaar & Partners v. Pilkington Bros. (S.A.) (Pty.) (1984) 1 Const.
Lawford v. Billericay Rural District Council (1903] 1 K.B. 772; 72 L.J.K.B. 554; 88 L.J. 211, South African Ct. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·292
L.T. 317; 51 W.R. 630; 67 J.P. 245; 19 T.L.R. 322; 47 S.J. 366; 1 L.G.R. Liesbosch Dredger v. Edison [1933) A.C. 449 ....................... 8·132, 8·149
535 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·104 Lind (Peter) and Co. v. Constable Hart and Co. [1979] 2Lloyd's Rep. 248;sub nom.
Lawrence v. Cassell [1930] 2 K.B. 83 .................... 4·075, 4·085, 4·105, 5·056 Constable Hart & Co. Ltd. v. Lind (Peter) & Co. Ltd (1978) 9 Build. L.R.1,
- v . Hayes [1927] 2K.B.111; 96 L.J.K.B. 658; 137 L.T.149; 91 J.P.141;43T.L.R. C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·050
379 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14·054 - v. Mersey Docks and Harbour Board [1972] 2 Lloyd's Rep 234....... 1.038, 1·039,
Lawson v. Wallasey Local Board (1883) 11 Q.B.D. 229; 52LJ.Q.B. 302; 47 L. T. 624; 1·270, 3·066
47 J.P. 437 affirmed C.A. 48 L.T. 507. . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-153 6·015 10·091 18·095 Linden Garden Trust v. Lenesta Sludge Disposals; St. Martin's Properties Corp. v.
f
Leaf v. International Galleries [1950] 2 K.B. 86; [1950] 1 All E.R. 693; 66 T.L.R.. (Pt. ' Sir Robert McAlpine & Sons [1994] 1 A.C. 85; [1993] 3 W.L.R 408;57 BLR
1) 1031; [101 L.J. 61;25 A.L.J.443; 13 M.L.R. 362], C.A ...... 1·144, 1·146, 1·148, I 57; Financial Times, February 20, 1992; The Times, February 27, 1992, The
Independent, March 6, 1992, C.A.; reversing 52 B.L.R. 93; 25 Con. L.R. 28;

!
1·153
Learoyd v. Whiteley (1887) 12 App. Cas. 727; 57 L.J.Ch. 390; 58 L.T. 93; 36 W.R. [1991] EGCS 11. ........ 1·219, 8·142, 8·155, 8·227, 8·228, 13·014, 14·001, 14·002,
721 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Z.204 14·002A, 14·004, 14·011, 14·015, 14·019, 14·041, 14·027, 14-029, 14·030,
LeBeaupin v. Crispin [1920] 2K.B. 714; [1920] AIIE.R. Rep. 353; 89 L.J.K.B. 1024; 14·032, 14·036, 14·050, 14.058, 14·060, 14·062, 16·027, 18.124, 18.125
124 L. T. 124; 36 T.L.R. 739; 64 S.J. 652; 25 Com. Cas. 335 . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·267 Lindenberg v. Canning (1992) 62 BLR 147 . . 4·103
Lee v. Bateman (Lord) (1893) The Times, October 31 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·187 LlntestBuilders v. Roberts (1980) 13 Build. L.R. 38, C.A.;affirming (1978) lOBuild.
Lee and Chapman, ex parte, re Asphaltic Wood Pavement Co. (1885) 30 Ch.D. 216; L.R.120 ................ .
54 L.J.Ch. 460; 53 L.T. 63; 33 W.R. 513..... 14·050, 16·007, 16·008, 16-015, 16·016, Lister v. Romford Ice and Cold Storage Co. Ltd. [1957] A.C. 555; [1957] 2 W.L.R.
16·029 158; [1957] 1 AllE.R.125; 121 J.P. 98; 101 S.J.106sub nom. Romford Ice &
Lee and Hemingway, Re, (1834) 15 Q.B. 305 n.; 3 Nev. & M. 860. . . . . . . . . . . . 18-064 Cold Storage Co. v. Lister [1956) 2 Lloyd's Rep. 505; [73 L.Q.R. 283; 20
Leedsford Ltd. v. City of Bradford (1956) 24 BLR 45 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5·019 M.L.R. 220, 437; 22 M.L.R. 652; 121 J.P.J. 128; 24 Sol.177; 101 S.J. 217; 103
Legge v. Har lock (1848) 12 Q.B.1015; 18 L.J.Q.B.45; 12L.T.(o.s.) 291; 13 Jur.( o.s.) S.J. 161; 227 L.T. 67; [1957] C.LJ. 25; 94 I.L.T.R. 85], H.L.; affirming sub
229; 76 R.R. 461. .............................. 10·028, 10·040, 10·041 nom. Romford Ice and Cold Storage Co. v. Lister [1956J 2 Q.B. 180; [1955J 3
L'Estrange v. Graucob (F.) Ltd. (1934] 2 K.B. 394; 103 L.J.K.B. 730; 152 L.T. 164; W.L.R 631; [1955] 3 All E.R 460; 99 S.J. 794; [1955] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 325; [221
[1934]A11E.R.Rep.16,D.C......................... 1·094 1·100 1·102 L.T. 31; 106 L.J. 4, 68, 342,; 1956 S.L.T. 1; [1956] C.L.J. 101, 72 L.Q.R. 7];
Leicester Board of Guardians v. Trollope (1911) (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 419 75 '1.P. ' [1955] C.L.Y. 984, C.A ................................. 1·181, 15·007
197...................................... Z.025 2·183 Z.188 2·215 --v. Stubbs (1890) 45 Ch. D.1;59 L.J. Ch. 570; 63 L.T. 75; 58 W.R. 548; 6 T.L.R.
Le Lievre v. Gould [1893] 1 Q.B. 491; 62 L.J.Q.B. 353; 68 L.T. 626;41 W'.R. 468; 57 ' 293,317.............................................. 3·079
J.P. 484; 37 S.J. 267; 4 R. 274 sub nom. Dennis v. Gould 9 T.L.R. 243, i Liverpool City Council v. Irwin (1977] A.C. 239; [1976] 2 W.L.R. 562; [1976] 2 All
C.A. ........... ..... ...
Leigh and Sillavan Ltd. v. Aliakmon Shipping Co. Ltd. [1986] A.C. 785; [1986] 2
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·280 II. E.R. 39; 120 SJ. 267; [1976J J.P.L. 427; (1976) 32 P. & C.R. 43; (1976) 74
L.G.R. 392; (1976) 238 E.G. 879, H.L.; varying [1976] Q.B. 319; [1975] 3
W.L.R. 902; [1986} 2 AIIE.R.145; (1986) 130 S.J. 357; [1986] 2Lloyd's Rep.
1; (1986) 136 New L.J. 415; [136 New L.J. 1169], H.L.; affirming [1985] Q.B.
! W.L.R. 663; 119 S.J. 612; [1975] 3 AllE.R. 658; (1975) 74 L.G.R. 21; 31 P. &
C.R. 34, C.A......... 1·181, 1·189
350; [1985] 2 All E.R. 44; (1985) 129 S.J. 69; [1985} 1 Lloyd's Rep. 199; [1985] Livingstone v. Rawyards Coal Co. (1880) 5 App. Cas. 25. . .... 8·110, 8·121, 8·126
L.M.C.L.Q. 1; (1985) 82 L.S.Gaz. 203; (1985) 135 New L.J. 285, C.A.; revers- Lloyd v. Grace Smith & Co. [1912] A.C. 716; 28 T.L.R. 547; 81 L.J.K.B. 1140; 107
ing (1983] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 203 ............................... 1·322 L.T. 531; 56 S.J. 723. 2·232
Leighton Contractors v. Kilpatrick Green Ltd. (1992) 2 V.R. 505........ 8·097, 18·174 Lloyd Brothers v. Milward (1895) (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 262.......... 6·040, 6·068, 6-079,
Leighton Contractors Ltd. v. Melbourne Board of Works (1975] V.R. 555. . 8·054, 8·055 6-083, 6·092, 6·095, 6·177, 6·218, 6·226, 18·063
Len Co. & Associates v. U.S. 385 F. (2d) 438 (1967). . . . . . . . . . . 4·220 7·070 Lloyds Banlc v. Guardian Assurance and Trollope & Coils (1987) 35 Build. L.R. 34,
Len~ Lease Homes Pty. Ltd. v. Warrigal [1970] 3 N.S.W.R. 265 . . . . . . . . . . . . '2·275 C.A. . . 1·339
Leslie& Co. Ltd. v. Managers of Metropolitan Asylums District (1901) 68J.P. 86; 1 Locke v. Morter (1885) 2 T.L.R. 121. ... ·. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·072, 2·265, 2·288
L.G.R. 862........ 3·020, 4·060, 4·122, 4·185, 4·187, 8.073, 13·009, 13·017, 13·032, Lockie and Craggs Re (1902) 86 L.T. 388; 9 Asp.M.C. 296; 7 Com. Cas. 7 . . . . . . 9-030
13·034, 13·039, 13·040, 13·089 Ladder v. Slowey [1904] A.C. 442; 73 L.J.P.C. 82; 91 L.T. 211; 53 W.R.131; 20T.L.R.
Lester & Hughes v. White [1992] N.Z.L.R. 483 .... 1·277, 1·349, 1·359, 15·030 597, P.C........... 1·272, 2·260, 4·230, 8·104, 8·175, 9·031, 12·005, 12·025, J2.083
Lever Bros. v. Bell see Bell v. Lever Bros. Lojan Properties v. Tropicon Contractors [1991] 2 M.L.J. 70. . . . . . . . . . . . 6.204, 8· 106
Levi v. Levi (1833) 6 C. & P. 239 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3·080 Lombard North Central v. Butterworth [1987} Q.B. 527; [1987] 2 W.L.R. 7; (1987) 1
Lewis v. Anchorage Asphalt Paving Company (1975) 535 P. (2d) 1188..... 1·161, 4-101, All E.R. 267; (1987) 6 T.L.R 65; (1986) 83 L.S.Gaz. 2750, C.A...... 4·207, 4·211,
4· 143, 4·203 8·113, 9.013, 9·014, 9·015, 10.017
Lewis v. Averay (No. 2) [1973] 1 W.L.R. 510; [1973} 2 All E.R. 229, 117 S.J. 188, London, Chatham & Dover Ry. v. South Eastern Ry. [1892] 1 Ch. 120; (1893] A.C.
C.A.; reversing [1972] 1 Q.B. 198; [1971] 3 W.L.R. 603; [1971] 3 AllE.R. 907; 429; 63 L.J.Ch. 93; 69 L.T. 637; 1 R. 275; 8 T.L.R. 82. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·088
115 SJ. 755 [35 M.L.R. 306], C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·098 London Congregational Union Incorporated v. Harriss & Harriss (a firm) 1 All
- v . Brass (1877) 3 Q.B.D. 667; 37 L.T. 738;26W.R.152 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3·057 E.R. 15; (1986) 280, E.G. 1342; (1987) 3 Const.LJ. 37; (1987) 35 Build. LR.
- - v. Haverfordwest Rural District Council [1953] 1 W.L.R. 1486; 97 S.J. 877; 58; (1987) 8 Con. L.R. 52; [1986] 2 E.G.L.R. 155, C.A.; reversing in part
[1953] 2 All E.R. 1599; 52 L.G.R. 44....................... 18?169, 18·178 [1985] 1 AllE.R. 335; [1984] C.I.L.L. 85; (1984) 1 Const. L.J. 54.... 1·192, 1·1351,
- v . Hoare (1881)44 L.T. 66; 29 W.R. 357 ............ 6·217°, 14·054, 14·066, 17·015
1·367
 lxxxiv TABLE OF CASES TABLE OF CASES Ixxxv
London County Council v. Boot (Henry) & Sonsl..td. [1959] 1 W.L.R. 1069; [1959] M. J. Peddlesden Ltd. v. Liddell Construction {1981) 128 D.L.R. (3d) 360, Supreme
AllE.R. 636; 103 S.J. 918;59 L.G.R. 357; [76 L.Q.R 32], HL; reversing sub. Court B.C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·026
nom Boot (Henry) & Sons Ltd. v. London County Council [1959] 1 W.L.R. M.V. Myron (Owners) v. Tradax Export S.A. [1970) 1 Q.B. 527; [1969} 3 W.L.~.
133; [1959] 1 All E.R. 77; 103 SJ. 90; 57 L.G.R. 15; [75 L.Q.R. 149; 103 S.J. 292; sub nom. M.V. Myron (Owners) v. Tradax Export S.A., Panama City
190]; [1958] C.L.Y. 343, C.A.; restoring (1957) 56 L.G.R. 51; [1957] C.L.Y. R.P., 113 S.J. 404;sub nom. Myron {Owners) v. Trad ax Exports.A., Panama
355. · ... · · · ........ 1·099, 1·115, 1·121, 1·212, 1·214, 1·215, 3·051, 3·052, 8·054 City R.P. [1969] 2All E.R.1263;sub nom. Myron (Owners) v. Ttadax Export
London Export Corporation Ltd. v. Jubilee Coffee Roasting Co. Ltd. [1958) 1 S.A. [1969] 1. Lloyd's Rep. 411 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·090
W.L.R.661; [1958] 2AllE.R. 411; 102S.J. 452; [1958] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 367; [74 McAlpine v. Lanarkshire and Ayrshire Railway Co. {1889) 17 R. 113 18·095
LQ.R 471], C.A; affirming [1958) 1 W.LR 271; [1958J 1 All E.R. 494; 102 McAlpine (A.) & Son v. Transvaal Provincial Administration (1974) 3 S.A.L.R.
S.J.178; [1958] 1 Lloyd'sRep.197..................... 1·202 1·206 6·228 506. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·134, 2·135, 4·175, 4·176, 4·183, 7.054, 7·080, 7·114
London Gas Light Co. v. Chelsea Vestry (1860) 2 L.T. 217; 8 W.R. 416 .... '. . . '6.044 McAlpine Humberoak v. McDermott International, (1992) 58 BLR 1; Financial
London General Omnibus Co. v. Holloway [1912] 2 K.B. 77; 81 L.J.K.B. 603· 106 Times, March 13, 1992, C.A.; reversing 51 BLR 34; 24 Con L.R. 68 ...... · 7·089,
=n. . .. . .. : ... ~m 7·118, 8·171, 8·207, 8·210, 8·211, 18·145, 18·159, 18·159A, 18·159C
London School Board v. Johnson (1891) (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p.176. . . . . 5·054, 6·051, 6·054, McArdle v. Andmac Roofing Co.; McArdle v. Newton Bros; Same v. Same; Same v.
6·056, 8·112 Same [1967] 1 W.L.R. 356; [1967] 1 All E.R. 583; 111 S.J. 37; [31 M.L.R. 74],
--v. Northcroft (1889) (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 147............ Z.230, 2·235, 2·272, 2·285 C.A.; varying in part, affirming in part sub nom McArdle v. Andmac Roof-
London Steam S!one Saw Mills v. Lorden (1900) (4th ed) Vol. 2, p. 301 . . . . . . . 8·020 ing Co. [1966] 3 All E.R. 241; sub nom. McArdle v. Andmac Roofing;
London Steamship Owners Mutual Insurance Association Ltd. v. Bombay Trading McArdle v. Newton Bros.; Same v. Same; Same v. Same, 1 K.I.R. 761; [1966]
Co. Ltd. Felicie The, [1990] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 21 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14·039 C.L.Y. 1097 .. ................. 1·319
London & North Western Ry. v. Jones [1915] 2 K.B. 35; 84 L.J.K.B.1268; 113 L.T. McBeath v. Sheldon (1993) Aust. Tort Rep. 81-208 N.S.W. C.A............ · 2·108
724 · · · · · · · · · · · · · · .. · · · · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·090 McBride v. Vacher [1951] 2 D.L.R. (2d) 274 ......................... · 4·288
London & Paris Banking Corporation Re (1874) L.R. 19 Eq. 444 . . . . . . . . . . . 16·003 McCarthy v. Visser (1905) 22 Cape of Good Hope Rep. 122............ 5.046, 6-048,
London & South-Western Ra:ilway v. Flower (1875) 1 C.P.D. 77; 33 L.T. 687; 45 6·051, 6-155, 6°163, 6·187
L.J.C.P. 54 ....................................•......... 5·051 McOaren Maycroft v. Fletcher Development [1973] N.Z.L.R. 100.... 1·280, 1·372, 1·373
Lonergan v. San Antonio Loan & Trust 104S.W.1061 (1917), Texas......... 4·061 McConkey v. A.M.E.C. The Times, February 28, 1990, C.A ............... · 15·043
Longley (James) & Co. v. Reigate and Banstead Borough (1983) 22 Build LR 31 · McCrone v. Boots Fann Sales Ltd. (1981) S.L.T. 103.................. 1·243, 1·244
(1983) 133 New LJ. 1099, C.A ....................... 4·196 13.079 13·081 McCutcheon v. MacBrayne (David) Ltd. [1964] 1 W.L.R.125; [1964] 1 All E.R. 430;
- v. South West Thames Regional Health Authority (1983) 127 S.J. 597; (1984) ' 108 S.J. 93; [1964] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 16; 1964 S.C.(H.L.} 28; 1964 S.L.T. 66; [27
25 Build. L.R. 56; (1983) 80 L.S.Gaz 2362 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·097 M.L.R. 354; 80 L.Q.R.309; 114L.J. 452; 981.L.T. 297; 81 L.Q.R. 32]; revers·
Lonrho v. Shell Petroleum Co. (No. 2) [1982] A.C.173; [1980] 1 W.L.R. 627; (1980) ing [1963] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 123; 1962 S.C. 506; 1963 S.L.T. 30; [1963] CLY.
124 S.J. 412, H.L.; affinning [1980] Q.B. 358; [1980] 2 W.L.R. 367; (1980) 124 519; affirming [1962] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 303; 1962 S.L.T. 231; [1962] C.L.Y.
S.J. 205, C.A.; affinning The Times, February 1, 1978 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3·080 472. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : .. 1·202, 1·215
Lorne Stewart v. Sindall (Will~am) and !f:W. Thames Regional Health Authority Macdonald v. Dennys Lascelles (1933) 48 CLR. 457, High Ct. of Australta . . . . 17·014
seeSte":art (Lome) v. Sindall (Wilham) andN.W. Thames Regional Health McDonald v. Workington Corporation {1893) 9 T.L.R. 230 (4th ed.) Vol. 2,
Authonty
p. 228................................ 4048, 6·113, 6·115, 6·142, 6-221
Louis Dreyfus et Cie v. Parnaso Cia Naviera S.A. See Dreyfus (Louis) et Cie v. McDonnell v. Canada Southern Rly. (1873) 33 V.C.Q.B. 313. . . ........ 6.014, 9.009
Parnaso Cia Naviera S.A.
McE!roy v. Tharsis S. Co. (1877) 5 R. (Ct. ofSess.) 161. ............. 10·025, 10.031
Love v. Mack (1905) 92 L.T. 345; 93 L.T. 352 ...... .
2.204 McGarry v. Richards [1954] 2 D.L.R. 367 ........................... · 8·119
Lovell v. U.S. 59 a. Cl. 494 (1924) ..................... .
7·045 McGreevy v. Boomer (1880) Cas. Dig. (Can.) 73, 139 .................. · 6·169
Lovelock v. King (1831) 1 Moo. & Rob. 60; 42 R.R. 764 ................. . 7.074 Mcinnes v. Hall (1988) 7 A.C.L.R. 37. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·148, 18·164
Lowe v. Lombank Ltd. [1960] 1 W.L.R. 196; [1960] 1 All E.R. 611; 104 S.J. 210; [76 Macintosh v. Great Western Ry. (No. I); 1849, 1850, 1855) 18 L.J.Ch. 94; 19LJ.Ch.
L.Q.R.180; 23 M.L.R. 445; 104 S.J. 183, 921; 110 L.J. 200; 229 L.T.191;27 Sol. 374;24L.J.Ch.469;2DeG. &Sm. 758;2Mac. &G. 74;3Sm.&G.146; 14Jur.
136; 1960 S.L.T. 121; 951.L T. 137), CA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·170 819; 2 H. & Tw. 250; 15 L.T.(o.s.) 321; 79 R.R. 359.... : ......... 6·107, 6·146
Lowther v. Heaver (1889) 41 Ch.D. 248; 58 L.J.Ch. 482; 60 L.T. 310; 37 W.R. Macintosh v. Midland Counties Ry. (1845) 14M.& W. 548; 3 Rail. Cas. 780; 14 L.J.
465. · · · ... · · · ...................... 7·120, 7·122, 9·004, 12·078, 12-079 Ex. 338; 5 L.T.(o.s.) 537................................ 4-152, 10.027
- v. Swan [1915] T.F.D. 494, (South Africa) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·163 Mcintyre v. Gallagher (1883) 11 R. (Ct. of Sess.) 64 ................... · 5·011
Lubenham Fi~elities and Investment Co. v. South Pembrokeshire District Council MacJordan Construction v. Brookmount Erostin Ltd. 56 BLR 1; [1992] BCLC 350;
and Wigley Fox Partnership (1986) 33 Build. L.R. 39; (1986) 6 Con.L.R. 85; The Times, October 29, 1991, C.A. . ................. 8·085, 16·031, 16·057
(1986) 2 Const.LJ. 111, C.A.; affirming [1985] C.I.L.L. 214. . . . . . . . 1·220, 2·155 MacKay ex parte (1873) L.R. 8 Ch. App. 643. . . . . . 8·079, 13· 126, 16-045, 16·046, 16·056
2·198, 4-224, 6-042, 6·043, 6·098, 6·192 6·193 8·106 12·055 14·066 - - v. Barry Parochial Board (1883) 10 R. Ct. of Sess. (4th Ser.) 1046..... 6·136, 18·129
Lucas v. Godwin (1837) 3 Bing.N.C. 737; 4 Scott 502; 3 Hodges 114; 6 L:J.C.P. ' MacKay v Dick (1881) 6 App. Cas. 251; 29 W.R. 541. ... 1·187, 4·136, 6·117, 6·133, 6·145,
205. · · · ... · · · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9·004 9·006 9·017 9-019 . 6·150
Ludbrook v. Barrett (1877) 46 L.J.C.P. 798; 36 L.T. 616; 42 J.P. 23; w.R.. 649. '. ; .. '2·073 MacKender v. FeldiaA.G. [1967] 2 Q.B. 590; [1967] 2 W.L.R. 119; [1966] 3 All E.~.
6·110, 6·11i 847;sub nom MacKenda v. Feldia, 110 S.J. 81I;sub nom. Mac~en?er, Hill
Lu~lam v. Wilson 2 Ont.L.R. 549; 21 C.L.T. 554 . . . 6·103
and White v. Feldia A.G., C.H. Brachfield and SonsS.A. and D1amil S.R.L.

I
Luna Bros. v U.S. 369 F (2d) 701 (1966). . . . . 4·182 4·183 7·085 [1966] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 449; [1966] C.L. Y. 9908, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . · 18·007
Lyde v. Russell (1830) lB. & Ad. 394; 9 L.J. (o s.) K.B. 26; 35 RR. 327 .... '. . . it-004 McKenna v. McNamee (1887) 15 Can. S.C (Duval) 311; 14 Ont App. 339 . . . . . 4-252
LyleShippmgCo. v. Cardiff Corporation [1900] 2 Q.B. 638; 69L.J.Q.B. 889; 83 L.T. McKey v. Rorison [1953] N.Z.L.R. 498. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-087, 4·105, 4·124, 5·055
329; 49 W.R. 85; 5 Con. Cas. 397 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9·029 MacKnight Flintic Stone v. City of New York (1899) 160 N.Y. 72 . . . . . . . . . . . 4-113
Lynch v. Thorne [1956] 1 W.L.R. 303; 100 S.J. 225; [1956] 1 All E.R 744, CA .... 4·081 McKone v. Johnson (1966) 2 N.S.W.R. 471. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·077, 4-089
4.088, 4·089, 4·091, 4· I'oi, 4· 123 ! McLachlan v. Nourse [1928] S.A.S.R. 230 (Australia) . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-027
Lyons v. Nicholls [1958) N.Z.L.R. 409, N.Z. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Lyman Construction v. Village of Gurnee 403 N.E. {2d) 1325 (1980)
1·333
1·295 I Maclaine v.Gatty [1921] 1 A.C.376; [1920]AllE.R. Rep. 70;90L.J.P.C. 73; 124L.T.
385;37T.L.R.139; 26 Com. Cas.148,H.L. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . · 1·246

I
lxxxvi TABLE OF CASES TABLE OF CASES lxxxvii

McLaren Mayhew v. Fletcher Developments [1973] 2 N.Z.L.R. 100 . . . . . . . . . . 2·083 Matania v. National Provincial Bank (1936) 106 L.J.K.B. 113 1·339
McLaughlin and Harvey Pk. v. P.J.O. Developments Ltd. (1991) 55 BLR Matheson & Co. v. Tabab (A.) & Sons [1963] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 270 ........ 18·169, 18·178
101. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-046, 6· 185, 18-057 Matsovkis v. Priestman [1915] 1 K.B. 681; [1914-15] All E.R. Rep. 1077; 84 L.J.K.B.
MacMahon Construction v. Crestwood Estates [1971] W.A.R. 162. . . . . . 10.(184, 10·085, 967; 113 L.T. 48; 13 Asp. M.L.C. 68; 20 Com. Cas. 252 ........... · . . 4-268
10·089 Matthew v. Ollerton (1672) 4 Mod. 220. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.(122, 6-099
McMillan v. Chapman [1953] 2 D.L.R. (2d) 671. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-113, 1·114 Matthews v. Kuwait Bechtel Corporation [1959] 2 Q.B. 57; [1959] 2 W.L.R. 702;
McNamara Construction of Ontario v. Brook University Re. (1970) 11 D.L.R. 3d. [1959] 2 All E.R. 345; 103 S.J. 393; [[1959] C.L.J. 163; 75 L.Q.R. 300; 22
513 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-029 M.L.R.521;103S.J.534],C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-374
MacPherson& Kelley v. KevinJ. Prunty & Associates [1983] V.R. 573, Supreme Ct. May v. Lane (1894) 64 L.J.Q.B. 236; 43 W.R. 58, 193; 14 Rep. 231; 15 Rep. 432 . . 14·042
of Victoria . . . . . . ....................... 1-374 May & Butcher Ltd. v. R. [1934] 2 K.B. 17n; 103 L.J.K.B. 556n; 151 L.T. 246n,
McQuillan v. Ryan (1922) 64 D.L.R. 482. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·265, 4·266 H.L. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·046, 3-074
Magee v.Pennine Insurance Co. Ltd. [1969] 2 Q.B. 507; [1969] 2 W.L.R.1278; (1969] Mayfield Holdings v. Moana Reef [1973) 1 N.Z.L.R. 309, Supreme Ct., of
2 All E.R. 891; 113 S.J. 303; [1969] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 378, C.A......... 1·095, 1·105 Auckland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·145, 4-305, 12·001, 12·092, 12·096, 12-097
Mahmoud and lspahani Re. [1921] 2 K.B. 716; 90 L.J.K.B. 821; 125 L.T. 161; 37 Mayor of Columbus v. Qark-Dietz, 550 Fed. Supp. 610 (1982), Mississippi 1·305
T.L.R. 489; 27 Com. Com. 215 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·278 Mayor of London v. Southgate (1869) 38 L.J.Ch. 141 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-306
Mahomed Jan v. Ganga Bishnu Singh (1911) L.R. 38 Ind. App. 80 . . . . . . . . . . 7·120 Meadows and Kenworthy Re (1896) (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 265 ............. 6-080, 6-092
Mahoney v. Le Rennetel (1892) 13 N.S.W.Rep. (Equity) 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·146 Meates v. Att.-Gen. of New Zealand [1983] N.Z.LR. 385 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·282
Major v. Greenfield [1965] N.Z.L.R. 1035........ 5-045, 6,053, 6·079, 6-083, 6-095, 6·157 Mediterranean and Eastern Export Co. v. Fortress Fabrics (Manchester) [1948]
Makin v. Watkinson (1870) L.R. 6 Ex. 25 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-051 W.N. 244: [1948] L.J.R. 1536; 64 T.L.R. 337; 92 S.J. 362; [1948] 2 All E.R. 186;
Mallett v. Bateman (1865) L.R. 1 C.P.163; 1 H. & R.169; 35 LJ.C.P. 40; 12Jur.(N.s.) 81 Ll.L. Rep. 401. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-132, 18-161
122; 13 L.T. 410; 14 W.R. 225; 148 R.R 637 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-017 Medjuck & Budovitch v. Adi Ltd. (1980) 33 N.B.R. (::d) 271. ...... _- . . . . 2·092, 2·104
Malone v. Laskey [1907] 2 K.B.141; [1904-7] AllE.R. Rep. 304;76 L.J.K.B. 1134; 97 Meehan v. Jones and Others (1982) 149 C.L.R. 571, High Ct. of Australia; (1982) 42
L.T. 324; 23 T.L.R 399; 51 S.J. 356, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·314 A.L.R. 463................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-187
Maltin (C.M.A.) Engineering v. Donne (J.) Holdings (1980) 15 Build. L.R. Meigh and Green v. Stockingford Colliery Co. Ltd. (May 25, 1922)
61.................. . . . . . . . . . . . 18·137, 18-148, 18·159, 18-165 unreported. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·022, 8-023
Manakee v. Brattle [1970] 1 W.L.R. 1607; [1971] 1 All E.R. 464n. . . . . . . . . . . . 2·267 Meickle v. Maufe [1941] 3 All E.R.144; 85 S.J. 378. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . · 2·274, 2·275
Manchester (The City of) v. Fran Gerrard (1974) 6 BLR 70. . . . . . . 1·220, 5·037, 15·009, Mellor v. Denham (1~80) 5 Q.B.D. 4o7; 49 LJ.M.C. 89; 42 L.T. 493; 44 J.P. 472. . 2·013
15-026, 15.959 Mellowes PPG v. Snelling Construction (1989) 49 BLR 109. . . . . . . . . . . 6·006, 6-199
Manchester Diocesan Council of Education v. Commercial & General Investments Melville v. Carpenter (1853) 11 U.C.Q.B. 128.................. 7·063, 7,077, 7-094
[1970] 1 W.L.R. 241; 114 S.J. 70; [1969] 3 Ail E.R. 1593; 21 P. & C.R. 38 . . 12·043 Mendelssohn v. Normand Ltd. {1970] 1 Q.B.177; [1969] 3 W.L.R. 139; [1969] 2 All
Mander Raikes & Marshall (a firm) v. Severn-Trent Water Board Authority (1980) E.R.1215; (1969) 113 S.J. 263, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . · · · · 1·225
16 B.L.R. 34 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·006, 1·218, 2-264 Mercers Co. v. New Hampshire Insurance Co. See Wardens and C~mmonalty of the
Maney v. City of Oklahoma 300 P. 642 (1931), Oklahoma.............. 4·049, 4·061 Mystery of Mercers of the City of London v. New Hampshrre Insurance Co.
Mansal Pty. Ltd. v. Brokenshire (1982) (Unrep.) Supreme Court of Western Merchants'Trading Co. v. Banner (1871) LR.12Eq.18; 24 L.T. 861; 40 L.J.Ch. 515;
Australia, December 3, 1982 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-096 19 W.R. 707. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... 4.297, 12·085
Mansfield v. Doolin (1869) 4 Ir.L.R C.L 17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·012 Mersey Docks and Harbour Board v. Coggins and Griffith (Liverpool) [1947] A.C.
Manson v. Baillie (1855) 2 Macq. (H.L. Sc.) 149 R.R.120 ................ . 2·247 1; 115 L.J.K.B. 465; 175 L.T. 270; 62 T.L.R 533; [1946] 2 All E.R. 345; H.L.;
Maple Flock Company v. Universal Furniture Products Ltd. [1931] 1 K.B. 148 .. 9·003 affirming sub nom- McFarlane v. Coggins and Griffith (Liverpool) [1945]
Marentette v. City of Sudbury (1974) 45 D.L.R. (3d) 331; [1974] 3 O.R. 303 (Ontario K.B. 301 . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... ........ 2-184
Ct. of App.); (1972) 31 D.L.R. (3d) 398.................. 4-162, 8·198, 8·201 Mersey Steel & Iron v. Naylor (1884) 9 App. Cas. 434; 9 Q.B.D 648;51 L.J.Q.B. 576;
Marine Contractors, Inc. v. Shell Petroleum Development Co. of Nigeria [1984] 2 53 L.J,Q.B. 497; 47 L.T. 369; 51 L.T. 637. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·221, 4-223
Lloyd's Rep. 77; (1985) 27 Build. L.R. 127; (1984) 81 L.S. Gaz. 1044; C.A.; Mertens v. Home Freeholds Co. [1921] 2 K.B. 526; 90 L.J.K.B. 707; 125 L.T.
affirming [1983] Com. L.R. 251. ................... 18·058, 18-081, 18·167 355 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-233, 4·249, 4-254, 8·115, 8-117, 8,124
Markland Ass. v. Lohnes (1973) 33 D.L.R. (3d) 493, N.S. Sup. Ct. . . . . . . . . . . . 4·020 Merton London Borough v. Leach (Stanley Hugh) (1985) 32 Build. L.R. 51; (1986)
Marples Ridgeway & Partners v. C.E.G.B. [1964] Q.B.D. (Special Paper) (1970) 2 Const. L.J. 189. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·186, 1·197, 2·201, 4·095, 4·197, 6·097, 6-105,
Hudson Building Contracts, p. 867... 18·134, 18·138, 18·140, 18·168, 18·183, 18·191 6·113, 6·115, 6·141, 6·220, 7·118, 8·070, 8·071, 8·206, 8·207, 8-208,
Marryat v. Broderick. (1837) 2 M. & W. 369; M. & H. 96; 6 L.J. Ex.113; 1 Jur.(o.s.) 10·079, 10-089
242;46R.R.622........................................ 6-172 Merton London Borough v. Lowe (1982) 18 Build. L.R. 130, C.A.. . . 2-108, 2·116, 2·118,
Marsden v. Sambell (1880) 43 L.T. 120; 28 W.R. 952. . . . . . 4·227, 12-031, 12·050, 12·051, 2· 119, 2· 144, 2· 182, 2· 183
12-052 Metalimex Foreign Trade Corporation v. Eugenie Maritime Co. [1962] 1 Lloyd's
Marsden Urban District Council v. Sharp (1932) 48 T.L.R. 23. . ... 5·011, 5,054, 5·055, Rep. 378 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·048
5·056 Metcalfe Realty Co. v. Elite Interiors Ltd. and Elite Interiors of Canada Ltd. [1966]
Marshall v. Broadhurst (1831) 1 C. & J. 403; 1 Tyr. 348 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-072 2 O R 433 Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·097
~-v. Macintosh (1898) 78 L.T. 750; 46 W.R. 580; 14 T.L.R. 458 10·011
i Metropoli~a~ As;lums Board v. Kingham (1890) 6 T.L.R. 217.......... · 1·028, 3.(168

I
Martin v. McNamara (1951) [1951] Q.S.R. 225, Queensland. . . . . . . . 4-085; 4·118, 4·120 Metropolitan Tunnel&PublicWorksv. London Electric Ry. [1926] Ch. 371; 95 L.J.
Martin Grant & Co. v. Sir Lindsay Parkinson & Co. (1984) 29 B.L.R 31. .... 4-159, 4·177 Ch. 246; 135 L.T. 35 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . · . . . 18·118
Maryland Casualty Co. v. Eagle River Union High School District 205 N.W. 926 Metropolitan Water Board v. Dick.Kerr & Co. [1918] A.C.119; 87 L.J.K.B. 370; 117
(1925) ............. 17.047 L.T. 766; 82J.P. 61; 16 L.G.R.1; 23 Com. Cas.148; 62S.J.102;34 T.L.R. 113
Maryon v.Carter (1830) 4 C. & P. 295. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9·019, 9·021 affirming [1917] 2 K.B. 1. ............. 4·233, 4·248, 4·253, 4·262, 4-275, 11.(128
Mason v. Clarke [1955] A.C. 778; [1955] 2 W.L.R. 853; 99 S.J. 274; [1955] 1 AIIE.R. Meva Corporation v. United States (1975) 511 F. 2nd 548 ............. 13·005, 13·014
914; H.L.; reversing [1954] 1 Q.B. 460; [1954] 2W.L.R. 48; 98S.J. 28; [1954] J , Meyer v. Gilmer (1899) 19 N.Z.L.R. 129. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·259, 6·153, 6-156,
All E.R.189; [1954] C.L.Y.1809, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·274 7·003, 7-058, 7-078, 7·080, 7,082, 7·095, 10·033, 10·040
Masters v. Cameron (1954) 91 C.L.R. 353; 28 A.L.J. 438 (Aus.). . . . . . . . . . 1-057, 3·056 Micklewright v. Mullock. (1974) 232 E.G. 337. . . . . . . . . . . . ...... 18·134, 18·148
 lxxxviii TABLE OF CASES TABLE. OF CASES lxxxix

Mid-Glamorgan County Council v. The Land Authority fo~ Wales 49 BLR 61; Moffat v. Laurie (1855) 15 c:B. 583; 1 Jur.(N.S.) 283; 24 LJ.C.P. 56; 3 W.R. 252; 24
. (1990} 6 Const. L.J. 234. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·046, 18.055 L.T.(o.s) 259; 100 R.R. 498. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·247, 2·249, 2·250
Midland Bank Pie. v. Bardgrove Property ,Services Ltd. [1993] 9 Const. L.J. --v. Scott (1863) 8 L.CJur. 310 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·272
49, C.A.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·343 Mogul Steamship Co. v. McGregor, Gow & Co. [1892] A.C. 25; 23 Q.B.D. 598; 61
Midland Bank Trust Co. v. Hett Stubbs & Kemp (a firm) [1979] Ch. 384; [1978] 3
W.L.R. 167; (1977) 121 S.J. 830; [1978] 3 All E.R. 571. ....... 1·281, 1·373, 2·083
ts~~·~:~:~; .4~ .~:~· .3:~;.
~6. ~·~·.1.0:;. ~6. ~?'.· :: ~ ~
~-s~ .. ~:~· _1:~;. ~:~·~:
Mohan v. Dundalk Ry. (1880) 6 L.R.lr. 477; 151 L.T. 11. . . 12·048, 12·063, 12·064, 12·065
3·080
Midland Motor Showrooms Ltd v Newman [1929] 2 K.B. 256; 98 L J.K.B 490, 141
L.T 230; 45 T.L.R 499 .... .. ..... ...... . 17·041 Molloy v. Liebe (1910) 102 L.T. 616 P.C......... 1·063;1·264, 1·269, 1·270, 4·220, 6·068,
6·146, 7°065, 7·066, 7·067, 7·069, 7·070, 7·076, 8·103, 8·104
Milas-Martin Pen Co. Ltd. v. Selsdon Fountain Pen Co. Ltd. (No. 2) (1950} 67
Molyneux v. Richard [1906] 1 Ch. 34; 75 L.J.Ch. 39; 93 L.T. 698; 54 W.R. 177; 22
R.P.C. 64 . ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·119
T.L.R. 76 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 4·306
Miles v. New Zealand Alford Estate Co. (1886} 32 Ch.D. 266; [1866--90] All E.R.
Mona Oil Equipment & Supply Co. Ltd. v. Rhodesia Railways Ltd. [1949] 2 All
Rep. Ext. 1726;55 L.J.Ch. 801; 54 L.T. 582; 34 W.R. 669, C.A.. . . . . . . . . 1·071 E.R 1014; [1950) W.N.10; 83 Ll.L. Rep.178........... . . . . . . . . . . 1·187
Milestone & Sons v. Yates Castle Brewery [1938] 2 All E.R. 439.... 6·068, 13·033, 13·124 Monaghan County Council v. Vaughan [1948] LR. 306 ................ 1·113, 1·119
Miller v. Advanced Farming (1969) 5 D.L.R. 3d 369 Supreme Court of Canada. . 4·022 Moncton (The City of) v. Aprile Contracting (1980) 29 N.B.R. (2d) 631, New Brun-
- - v. Cannon Hill Estates Ltd. [1931] 2 K.B. 113; 100 L.J.K.B. 740; 114 L.T. swick C.A.; (1977) 17 N.B.R. (2d) 678. . . . . . . . . . . . 1·297, 1·306A, 2·140, 4-052,
567. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·075, 4·078, 4·085, 4·087, 4·105, 8·158 5·038, 10·047, 10·051, 10·052
--v. Dames & Moore (1961) Cal. App. (2d) 305 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·283 - v. Stephen (1956) 5 D.L.R. (2d) 722, Canada. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·063, 2·247
--v. London County Council (1934) 50 T.L.R. 479; 151 L.T. Mandel v. Steel (1841) 8 M. & W. 858; 10 L.J.Ex. 426; 1 D.P.C.(N.s) 1; 58 R.R.
425 ........... 6·036, 6·041, 8·220, 10-082, 10·083, 10·084, 10·085, 10·086, 10·091 890. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·253, 1·254, 5·008, 6-201
Miller (James) & Partners Ltd. v. Whitworth Street Estates (Manchester) Ltd. Moneypenny v. Hartland (1826) 2 C. & P. 378; 31 R.R. 672 ............. 2·111, 2·125,
[1970] A.C. 583; 2 W.L.R. 728; [1970] 1 All E.R. 796; [1970] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 2·156, 2·158, 2·160, 2·202
269; 114 S.J. 225, H.L.; reversing sub nom. Whitworth Street Estates Monk (A.) & Co. v. Devon County Council (1978) 10 Build. L:R. 9, C.A. . . . . . . 13·049
(Manchester) Ltd. v. Miller (James) and Partners Ltd. [1969] 1 W.L.R. 377; Monk Construction Ltd. v. Norwich Union Life Assurance Society (1992) 62 BLR
[1969] 2 All E.R. 210; 113 S.J. 126; [86 L.Q.R. 13], C.A. ........... 1-0141 1·222 107,C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·015,3.071
Mills v. Bayley (1863) 2 H. & C. 36; 32 L.J.Ex. 179; 8 L.T. 392; 9 Jur.(N.s.) 499; 11 Monkhouse Pty. Ltd. Re. [1968] 2 N.S.W.L.R. 664................... 8·079, 13·126
W.R. 598; 133 R.R. 579. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·0361 6·176 6·177 Monmouth County Council v. Costelloe & Kemple (1965) 63 L.G.R. 429, C.A.;
Milner v. Field (1850) 5 Ex. 829; 20 L.J. Ex. 68; 82 R.R. 885 ............ • • • '6·037 reversing sub nom. Monmouthshire County Council v. Costelloe & Kemple
Minifie v. Railway Passengers Assurance Co. (1881) 44 L.T. 552 -. . . . . . . . . . . . 18·104 (1964) 63 L.G.R. 131; [1965] C.L.Y. 369 ............ 1·009, 8·064, 8·065, 18-053
Ministry of Housing and Local Government v. Sharp [1970] 2 Q.B. 223; [1970] Monro v. Bognar Urban District Council [1915] 3 K.B. 167; 84 K.J.K.B. 1091; 112
2 W.L.R. 802; [1970] lAllE.R.1009; 114S.J.109;68LG.R.187;21 P. &C.R. LT.969;79J.P.286;13L.G.R.431;59S.J.348 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ·. 18·102
166; (34 Conv. 198], C.A.; reversing [1969] 3 W.L.R. 1020; 133 J.P. 595; 113 Montedipe S.p.A. v. JTP-RO Jugotanker; Jordan Nicolov, The [1990] 2 Lloyd's
Rep.11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14·038, 14·039, 18·125
S.J. 469; [1969] 3 All E.R. 225; 20 P. & C.R. 1101; (122 New L.J.
Montrose Contracting Company v. City of Westchester 80F. (2d) 841 (1936), 2nd
1149). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·281 1·284 1·309
Circuit, Court of Appeals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·061
Minister Trust v. Traps Tractors [1954] 1 W.L.R. 963; 98 S.J. 456; [1956] 3 All £.R. '
Moody v. Ellis (Trading as Warwick & Ellis) (1984) 26 Build. L.R. 39, C.A. 1·228
136. . .......... 6·019, 6-022, 6·031, 6·055, 6·065, 6·112, 6·123, 6·151, Moon v. Whitney Union (1837) 3 Bing N.C. 814; 6 L.J.C.P. 305; 5 Scott 1; 1 Jur.( o.s.)
6·154, 6-156, 6·158, 6·159, 6·160 41; 3 Hodges 206; 43 R.R. 802. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·069, 2·286, 2·287
Minter (F.G.) & Welsh Health Technical Services Organisation (1980) 13 Build. Moorcock, The (1889) 14 P.O. 64 . . 1·180
LR. 1, C.A.; reversing (1979) 11 Build. L.R. 1. ... 1·258, 7·052, 8·070, Moore v. Shawcross [1954) J.P.L. 431 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-049
. .. 8·071, 8·093, 8-095, 8·096, 8·215 Moore (D.W.) v. Ferrier [1988] 1 W.L.R. 267; [1988] 1 All E.R. 418, (1988) 132 SJ.
Miramar Mant1me Corp. v. Holbom Oil Trading Ltd; Miramar, The [1984] 1 A.C. 227 CA.............................................. 1·307
676; [(984] 3 W.L.R. 10; [1984] 2 All E.R. 326; (1984) 128 SJ. 414; [1984] 2 Moore (J;m~s) & Sons Ltd. v. University of Ottawa (1974) 49 D.L.R. (3d)
Lloyds Rep. 129; (1984) 81 L.S.Gaz. 2000, H.L.; affirming [1984] 1 Lloyd's 666. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·262,6·134,6·149
Rep. 142; [1983) 2 Lloyd's Rep. 319, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·220 More (James) v. University of Ottawa (1978) 85 D.L.R. (3d) 186, Fed. Ct.,
Mississippi Bank v. Nickles & Wells Construction Co. 421 So. {2d) 1056 (1982), Sup. Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·267, 2-062
Ct. of Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14·062 Moresk Cleaners v. Hicks [1966] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 338; 116 New L.J.
Mitchell v. Guildford Union (1903) 1 L.G.R. 857; 68 J.P. 84............ 4-187, 13·009, 1546. . . . . . 2·036, 2·074, 2·093, 2·105, 2·117, 2·118, 2·119, 2·120, 2·144, 4·073, 4·177
13·034, 13·077 Morgan v. Birnie (1833) 9 Bing. 672; 3 Moo. & Sc. 76; 35 R.R. 653 ........ 6·020, 6·036,
Mitsui Construction Co. v. Att.-Gen. of Hong Kong (1986) 33 Build. L.R. 1; 6-153, 6·155, 6-162, 7·058
(1986) 10 Con. L.R. l; (1986) 2 Const. L.J. 133, P.C.; (1984) 26 Build. L,R. Morgan v. Morgan (1832) 2 LJ.Ex. 56; 1 D.P.C. 611; ;36 R.R. 825 . . . . . . . . . . . 18·127
113, C.A. of Hong Kong...... 1·220,.1·221, 2·002, 2·168, 7·018, 8·003 8·013 8·040 --v. S. & S. Construction [1967] V.R. 149, Australia. . . . . . . . . . . 4-012, 4·014, 4·020,
Mobile f!ousing Environments v. Barton 432. F. (Supp.) 1343 [1975] Colorado bis- ' 4·022, 4·029, 10·059, 10·100
tr1ct . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3·027 Morgan Grenfell (Local Authority Finance) v. Seven Seas Dredging (No. 2) 51
Modem Buildings Wales v. Limmer & Trinidad Co. [1975] 1 W.LR.1281; 119 S.J. BLR 85. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·063, 8·098
641; [1975] 2 All E.R. 549; [1975] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 318 C.A.......... 1·126, 1·207, Morison v. Thompson (1874) L.R. 9 Q.B.480; 43 L.J.Q.B.215; 30 L.T. 869;22 W.R.
3·050, 3·051, 13·105, 18·027, 18·031 859 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·234
Modern Engineering (Bristol) v. Gilbert·Ash (Northern). See Gilbert-Ash (North- Morren v. Swinton and Pendlebury Borough Council [1965] 1 W.LR. 576; [1965]
ern) v. Modern Engineering (Bristol) 2 All E.R. 349; 63 L.G.R. 288; D.C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . · . 2·023
- - v. Miskin (C. & Son [1981] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 135; (1980} 15 Build. L.R. 820, Morris v. Ford Motor Co.; Cameron Industrial Services (Third Party); Roberts
C.A. · · · · · · · · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·138 18·149 18·165 (Fourth Party) [1973] 1 Q.B. 792; [1973] 2 W.L.R. 843; 117 S.J. 393; [1973] 2
Modem Trading Co. v. Swale Building and Construction (1990) 24 Con'. L.R. ' All E.R. 1084; [1973] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 27, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15·007
59 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ':' J8·167 - v. Martin (C.W.) & Sons [1966] 1 Q.B. 716; [1965] 3 W.L.R. 276; 109 S.J. 451;
Moffat v. Dickson (1853) 13 C.B. 543;22 L.J.C.P. 265; 17 Jur.(o.s.) 1009; 1 C.L.R. ,,. [1965] 2All E.R. 725; [1965} 2 Lloyd's Rep. 63; C.A......... 1·327, 2·232,4·108,
294; 93 R.R. 634 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·249, 2·250 4·122, 4·125
 xc TABLE OF CASES TABLE OF CASES xci
Morris v. Redland Bricks. See Redland Bricks v. Morris Mutual of Omaha Insurance Co. v. Stats (1978) 87 D.L.R. (3d) 169, Can.
Morris (K.D.) & Sons v. G.J. Coles (1972) 46 A.L.J.R. 464. . . . . . . . . . . . 15,018, 15·022 Sup. Ct. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15·010
Morrison v. Universal Marine Insurance Co. (1873) L.R. 8 Ex. 197; 42 L.J.Ex.115; Mvita Construction Co. Ltd. v. Tanzania Harbours Authority (1988) 46
21 W.R. 774 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12·051 BLR 19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12·007, 12·009, 12·050
Morrison-Knudsen Co. Inc. v. British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority [1978] Myers v. Sari (1860) 3 E. & E. 306; 30 L.J.Q.B. 9; 9 W.R. 96; 7 Jur.(N.s.) 97; 122 R.R.
85 D.L.R. (3d) 186; [1978] 4 W.W.R. 193, Brit. Col.......... 4·203, 4·219, 4·230, 710. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7·055, 7,058, 7·059
4·231, 4·252, 4.257, 4·263, 7·081, 8-104 Myers (G.H.) & Co. v. Brent Cross Services [1934] 1 K.B. 46. . . . . . . . . . . . 4·066, 4·068,
Morrison-Knudsen International v. Commonwealth (1972) A.L.J.R. 265 .... 1-159, 1·169
4·075, 4·085, 4·086, 4·089, 4·099, 4· 118, 4· 119, 4·120, 4·123
- v. State of Alaska 519 P. (2d) 834 (1974). . . 1·156, 1·160, 1·161, 1·166, 1·306C, 4·142,
Myron, The. See M.V. Myron (Owners) v. Tradax Export S.A.
· 8·062
Mortensen v. Laing (1991) 3 N.Z.B.L.C. 102, 301; [1992] 2 N.Z.L.R. 282. . . 1·279,
1·305, 1·306
Morton Construction Co. Ltd. v. Corporation of City of Hamilton [1962] O.R. 154
(Canada) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·063 1·084 7·067 N.B.P. Developments v. Buildko & Sons (formerly William Townson & Sons Ltd.)
Moschi v. Lep Air Services [1973] A.C. 331; [1972] 2 W.L.R. 1175; 116 S.J. 312; ' (in Liquidation) (1992) 8 Const. L.J. 377 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14·039
[1972] 2 AllE.R. 393, H.L.; affirming sub nom. Lep Air Services v. Rolloswin NEIThompson v. Wimpey Construction U.K. (1988) 39 B.L.R. 65; (1988) 4 Const.
Investments [1971] 3 All E.R. 45, C.A....... 17·011A, 17·011B, 17·011F, 17·012, L.J. 46, C.A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5·015, 6·006, 6·058, 6·198
17·014, 17·021, 17·029, 17·035 N.Z. Structures Ltd. v. McKenzie [1983] N.Z.L.R. 298 C.A.; [1979] 1 N.Z.L.R.
Mosely v. Virgin (1796) 3 Ves.184 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.300 515. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10·085, 10·086
Moser v. St. Magnus and St. Margaret (Churchwardens of) (1795) 6T.R. 716 . . . 6·146 Nabarro v. Frederick Cope & Co. Ltd. (1938) 83 S.J. 74; [1938] 4 All E.R. 565. . . 4·149
Moss v. London & North West Railway Co. (1874) 22 W.R. 532 . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-009 Nash Dredging v. Kestrel Marine Ltd. (1986) S.L.T. 62 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·098
Mottram Consultants v. Sunley (Bernard) & Sons (1974) 118 S.J. 808; [1975] 2 National Carriers v. Panalpina (Northern) [1981] A.C. 675; [1981] 2 W.L.R. 45,
Lloyd's Rep.197, H.L.; affirming sub nom. Sunley (Bernard) & Sons v. Mot- (1980) 125 S.J. 46; [1981] l All E.R. 161; (1982) 43 P. &. C.R. 72, H.L...... 4·233,
tram Consultants (1973) 228 E.G. 723, C.A................ 1·223, 6·200, 6-201 4·234, 4·235, 4·236, 4·238, 4·251, 4-259
Mounds View (The City of) v. Walijarui (1978) 263 N.W. (2d) 420. . . 2·088, 2·089, 2·103, National Coal Board v. Leonard & Partners (1985) 31 Build. L.R. 117 . . . . . . . . 2·264
2·106 - v . Neill (William) & Son (1985] Q.B. 300; [1984] 3 W.L.R.1135; (1984) 128 S.J.
Mount Albert Borough Council v. Johnson [1979] 2 N.Z.L.R. 234, C.A..... 1·357, 1·384, 814; [1984] 1 Al!E.R. 555; (1984) 26Build. L.R. 81; [1984] 81 L.S.Gaz. 2930;
1·388, 1·389 (1983) 133 New L.J. 938, D.C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5·013, 5·016, 5·045, 5·055, 5·057,
Mount Albert City Council v. New Zealand Municipalities Insurance Co-op [1983]
6·004, 6·035, 6·046, 6·049, 6·058, 6-059, 6·060, 6·061, 6·077, 6·091, 6-095
N.Z.L.R. 190 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15·010
Mowbray v. Merryweather [1895] 2 Q.B. 640; 65 L.J.Q.B. 50; 14 R. 767; 73 L.T.459; National Enterprises v. Racal Communications; Racal Communications v.
44 W.R. 49; 59 J.P. 804. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·335, 8·157, 15·049, 15·051, 15·054 National Enterprises [1975) Ch. 397; [1975] 2 W.L.R. 222; 118 S.J. 735; (1974]
Moyer v. Graham 285 So. (2d) 937 {1973) 1·295 3 All E.R. 1010; [1975] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 225, C.A.; affirming [1974] Ch. 251;
Moyers v. Soady (1886) 18 L.R. Ir. 499. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·014 18·095 18·108 [1974] 2 W.L.R. 733; (1973) 118 S.J. 329; [1974] 1 All E.R. 1118; [1974] 2
Muirv.James [1953] 1 Q.B.454; [1953] 2 W.L.R.423; 117 J.P.126;97 S.J.132· b953J ' Lloyd's Rep. 21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·075, 18·076
1 All E.R. 494n; C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '. . . . . 4.277 National Provincial Bank of England v. Marshall (1888) 40 Ch.D. 112; 58 L.J.Ch.
Muirhead v. Industrial Tank Specialities [1986] Q.B. 507; [1985] 3 W.L.R. 993; 229; 60 L.T. 341; 53 J.P. 356; 37 W.R. 183; 5 T.L.R. 81 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10·001
[1985] 3 AllE.R. 705; [1985] E.C.C. 225; (1985) 129 S.J. 855; {1985) 135 New National Westminster Bank v. Halesowen Presswork & Assemblies [1972] A.C.
L.J.1106; {1986) 83 L.S.Gaz.117, C.A............ 1·292, 1·292A, 1·323, 13·045 785; [1972] 2 W.L.R.455; 116 S.J.138; [1972] 1 AllE.R. 641; [1972] 1 Ll?yd's
Muldoon v. Pringle (1882) 9 R. (Ct. of Sess.) 915. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-036, 6·050 Rep. 101, H.L.; reversing sub nom. Halesowen Presswork & Assemblies v.
Mullin (Pty.) Ltd. v. Denade Ltd. [1952] 1 S.A.L.R. 211 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·184 Westminster Bank [1971] 1 Q.B. l; [1970] 3 W.L.R. 625; [1970] 3 All E.R.
Multiplex Constructions Pty. Ltd. v. Abgarus Pty. Ltd. (1992) (Unrep.) Sup. Ct., 473, C.A.; reversing [1970] 2 W.L.R. 754; 113 S.J. 939; [1970] 1 All E.R.
N.S.W., 1992 Case No. 55042 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·162, 8·167, 10-018, 10·020 33 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16·015, 16.017, 16-019
Munelly v. Calcon Ltd. [1978] I.R. 387, Sup. Ct. of Ire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·141 - v . Riley [1986] F.L.R. 213, C.A. . . . . . . . 17·013
Munro v. Butt (1858) 8 E. & B. 738; 4 Jur.(N.s.) 1231; 30 L.T.(o.s.) 119; 112 Natus Corporation v. U.S. 371 F. (2d) 450 (1967) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·150, 4·203, 4·237
R.R. 752 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·007, 4·232, 5·003, 5·005, 6·037 Nauru Phosphate Royalties Trust v. Matthew Hall (1993) 12 A.C.L.R. 99 (Supreme
--v.;yvenhoeRy. {1865) 4De G.J. & S. 723; 11 Jur.(N.s.) 612; L.T. 562, 655; 13 Ct. of Victoria. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·201, 8·211, 18·159C, 18·1590
.R. 880; 146 R.R. 532 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12·084 NeaAgrexSA v. Baltic Shipping Co. [1976] Q.B. 933; [1976] 2 W.L.R 925; 120 S.J.
Murdoch v. Luckie (1897) 15 N.Z.L.R. 296 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10·033, 10·040, 10·041, 351; [1976] 2 All E.R. 842; [1976] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 47, ~.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·028
10·074, 10·080, 10·081, 10·089 Neale v. Richardson (1938] 1 All E.R. 753; (1938) 54 T.L.R. 539; 158 L.T. 308; 82 S.J.
Murphy v. Brentwood District Council [1991] 1 A.C. 398; [1990] 3 W.L.R. 414;
331, C.A.. . . . . . . . . . . 1·220, 6·063, 6·066, 6·067, 6·073, 6-091, 6·093, 6·096, 6·131,
(1990] 2All E.R. 908; (1990) 22H.L.R. 502; {1990) 134 S.J. 1076;21 Con. L.R
1; 89 L.G.R. 24; ~1990) 6 Const. L.J. 304; (1990) 154 L.G. Rev.1010;50 BLR 6·147, 18-069
1; (1991) 3 Admm. L.R. 37;H.L.; reversing [1990] 2 W.L.R. 944; [1990] 2All Neilsen (Canberra) Pty. Ltd. v. PDC Constructions (1987) B. & C. Const. L.J.
E.R. 269; 88 L.G.R. 333; (1990) 134 S.J. 458; [1990] L.S.Gaz. February 7, 42, m....... 1=
C.A.; affirming 13 Con. L.R. 96. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·274, 1·277, 1·306, 1·307, Nelson v. Spooner (1861) 2 F. & F. 613; 121 R.R. 819. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Z.157
1·309, 1·327, 1·345, 1·349, 1·352, 1 ·353, 1·355, 1·357, 1·358, 1·359, 1·360, Nene Housing Society Ltd. v. National Westminster Bank Ltd. [1980] 16 B.L.R.
1·361, 1·363, 1·364, 1·373, 1·388, 2·084, 2·110, 2·151, 2·152, 4·285, 22 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·003, 4·004, 5·028, 17·011B, 17·012, 17·012A
4·287, 13·044, 14·002A Neodox Ltd. v. Swinton & Pendlebury Borough Council (1958) Build. L.R.
- - v. London Borough of Southwark (1981) 18 Build. L.R. 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·053 34. . . . . . . 2·017, 2-133, 2·141, 4·043, 4·157, 4·176, 4·177, 6·081, 6·097, 6·105, 6·113,
Murray v. Co_hen (1888) 9 N.S.W. Rep. Eq. 124. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·036, 6·068, 6·177 6·115, 6·141, 7·037, 7·039, 18°051
--v. Rennie (1897) 24 R. (Ct. of Sess. Cas.) 965 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3·068 Neptusky v. Dominion Bridge Company Ltd. (1969) [1969] 68 W.W.R. 529
Mutual Life and Citizens' Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Evatts {Clive Raleigh) [1971] A.C. Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·275, 2-276
793; [1971] 2 W.L.R. 23;sub nom. Mutual Life & Citizens' Assurance Co.\{; ., Nesbitt v. U.S. 345 F. 2nd 583 (1965) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12·016
Evatts [1971] 1 All E.R. 150; 114S.J. 932; (1970] 2Lloyd's Rep. 441; [[1971]-<· Nevill (H.W.) (Sunblest) Ltd. v. William Press & Son (1982) 20 Build. L.R 78.... 4·005,
C.L.J.193], P.C... . . 1·134, 1·154, 1·282 5·028, 5·042, 5-043, 5·049, 5·059, 6-017, 6·076, 6·085, 8·158
 xcii TABLE OF CASES
TABLE OF CASES xciii
New Pueblo Construction v. State of Arizona 696 P. (2d) 185 (1985) ....... 4-061, 8·198
New Zealand Shipping Co. Ltd. v. Satterthwaite (A.M.) & Co. Ltd. [1975] A.C. 154; Northampton Gas Light Co. v. Parnell (1855) 15 C.B. 630; 1 Jur. 211;24L.J.C.P. 60;
[1974} 2 W.L.R. 865; [1974} 1 All E.R. 1015; 118 S.J. 387; sub nom. New 3 C.L.R. 409; 3 W.R. 179; 100 R.R. 520. . . . . . . . . . . 6-011, 6·065, 17·011E, 18·084
Zealand Shipping Co. Ltd. v. Satterthwaite (A.M.) & Co. Ltd.; Eurymedon, Northern Collstruction Co. Ltd. v. Gloge Heating and Plumbing Ltd. (1986) 27
D.L.R. (4d) 265; [1986] 2 W.W.R. 649, Alberta C.A.; (1984) 1 Const. LJ.
The [1974] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 534, P.C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.065
Newbigging v. Adam. See Adam v. Newbigging. 144 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ...... 1·026
Northern Regional Health Authority v. Crouch (Derek) Construction Co. [1984}
Newfoundland Government v. Newfoundland Ry. (1888) 13 App. Cas. 199; 57
Q.B. 644; [1984] 2 W.L.R. 676; (1984) 128 279; [1984] 2All E.R.175; (1984)
L.J.P.C. 35; 58 L.T. 285; 4 T.L.R. 292. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . 4·026, 14-051 26 Build. L.R. 1; C.A.; affirming (1983) 24 Build. L.R. 60, D.C.. . . . . 2·078, 2·217,
Newham London Borough Council v. Taylor Woodrow-Anglian Ltd. (1981) 19 6-010, 6·063, 6-064, 6·093, 6·094, 6-095, 6·182, 6·185, 6·192, 6·193, 6·218,
Build. L.R. 99, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-045, 1·217, 4·115 6-220, 10·069, 12·045, 13·048, 13·050, 13.051, 18-012, 18·112, 18-114,
Newitt, ex parte, re Garrud (1881) 16 Ch.O. 522; 51 LJ.Ch. 381; 44 L.T. 5; 29 W.R. 18·122, 18-193, 18-194
344. . . . . . . . . 11·025, 11·033, 11·041, 11·049, 12·051, 12·053, 12·063, 12·066, 16·042 Northumberland Avenue Hotel Co., Re, Fox and Braithwaite's Claim (1887) 56
Newman, Re, ex parte Capper (1876) 4 Ch.D. 724; 46 L.J.B.K. 57; 35 L.T. 718; 25 L.T. 833. . . .......................... .... 6-021
W.R. 244 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-010 Northwood Development Co. v. Aegon Insurance (1994) 66 BLR. . . . 17·011C, 17·011E,
Newton v. Forster (1844) 12 M. & W. 772 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-087 17·011F, 17·012A
Newton Abbot Development Co. Ltd. v. Stockman Brothers (1931) 47 T.L.R. Norwich City Council v. Harvey (Paul Clarke) [1989] 1 W.L.R. 828; (1989) 133 S.J.
616. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·052, 6·055, 6-056, S.125, 8·127, 8·137, 8·227, 8·228 694· [1989] 1 All E.R. 1180; 45 BLR 14; (1989) 139 New L.J. 40, C.A....... 1·326,
Ng v. Clyde Securities [1976] 1 N.S.W.L.R. 443 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·278 ' 13-043, 15·011, 15·014
Nichols v. Marsland (1875) L.R. 10 Ex. 255; (1876) 2 Ex. D. 1; [1874--80] All E.R. Norwood v. Lathrop (1901) 178 Massachusetts Rep. 208 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7·078
Rep. 40; 46 L.J.Q.B. 174; 35 L.T. 725; 41 J.P. 500; 25 W.R. 173, C.A ....... 1·338, Nu-West Houses Ltd. v. Thunderbird Petroleums Ltd. (1975) 59 D.L.R. (3d)
4-266 292. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·119, 8·129
Nicholson-Brown v. City of San Jose, 62 Cal. App. (3d) 526 (1976) 1·305 Nunes (J.) Diamonds v. Dominion Electric Protection Co. (1972) 26 D.L.R. (3?)
Nicholson and Venn v. Smith Marriott (1947) 177 L.T. 189 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·096 699; Canadian Supreme Ct.; affirming (1971) 15 D.L.R. (3d) 26, Ontano
Nico Jene Ltd. v. Simmonds [1953] 1 Q.B. 543; [1953] 2 W.L.R. 717; [1953} 1 All E.R. C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-372
822; 97 S.J. 247; [1953] 1 Lloyd's Rep.189. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·045, 1-148 1·180 Nuttal v. Manchester Corporation (1892) (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 203; 8 T.L.R. 513. 18·130,
NitriginEireann Teoranta v. IncoAlloysLtd. [1992] 1 W.L.R.498; [1992] 1 AllE.R. ' 18-131
854; (1992) 135 S.J.(L.B.) 213; [1992} L.S. Gaz., January 22, 34; [1991] N.P.C. Nuttall and Lynton and Barnstaple Ry. Re (1899) 82 L.T. 17; (4th ed.) Vol. 2,
17; (1991) 141 New L.J. 1518; The Times, November 4, 1991; The Indepen- p.279. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·041,4·049,8-017
dent, November 28, 1991. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·351, 1·360, 1·364, 1·369 Nye Saunders & Partners (a firm) v. Bristow (1987) 37 Build. L.R. 92 2·159
Nixon v. Taff Vale Railway (1848) 7 Hare 136; 12L.T.(o.s.) 347 . . . . . . . . . . . . 7·064
Nocton v. Ashburton [1914] A.C. 932 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·159 O'Brien v. The Queen (1880) 4 Can. S.C. (Duval) 529 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·052
Nokes v. Doncaster Amalgamated Collieries [1940] A.C. 1014; 109 L.J.K.B. 865; O'Connor v. Norwich Union Insurance [1894] 2 Ir. R. 723 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·096
163 L.T. 343; 56 T.L.R. 988; [1940] 3 All E.R. 549 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14·003 O'Connor and Whitlaw's Arbitration Re (1919) 88 L.J.K.B. 1242 . . . . . . . . 6·228
Nolan Brothers v. U.S. 405 F. 2nd 1250 (1969) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12·016 O'Dea v. Allstates Leasing System (1983) 152 C.L.R. 359. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10·018
Norair Engineering Corporation v. U.S. 666 F. 2nd 546 (1981) . . . . . . . . . . . 7·050, 8·199 O'Driscoll v. Manchester Insurance Committee [1915} 3 K.B. 499. . . . . . . . 14·064,
Norjal A/S v. Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. See K!S Norjarl A/S v. Hyundai Heavy 14-065, 14-067, 14-069
Industries Co. O'Grady v. Westminster Scaffolding [1962] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 238 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·138
Normoyle-Berg v. Village of Deer Creek 350 N.E. (2d) 559 (1976), Illinois . . . . . 1-305 Ocean Tramp Tankers Corporation v. V!O Soufracht. The Eugenia [1964] 2 Q.B.
Norsk Pacific Steamship v. Canadian National Railway [1992] 1 S.C.R. 1021; 91 226; [1964} 2 W.L.R.114; 107 S.J. 931; [1964] 1 All E.R.161 [1963) 2 Lloyd's
D.L.R. (4th), 289. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·277, 1·322, 1·324 Rep. 381; C.A.; reversing [1963] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 155; [1963] C.L.Y. 3200.... 4·234,
Norta Wallpapers (Ireland) v. Sisk and Sons (Dublin) [1978] LR. 114; 14 Build. L.R. 4·237
49, Sup. Ct. of Ireland. . . . . . . . . . . 4-073, 4·074, 4·079, 4·092, 4·094, 4-098, 4·108, Ogilvie v. Cooke & Hannah [1952] Ont. R. 862 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·118
13·008, 13·029, 13·063 Ogilvie Builders Ltd. v. Glasgow City D.C. T.N. 4.5. 1994, ~.L. Scotian~ ..... · 8-095
North v. Bassett[1892] 1 Q.B.333;61 L.J.Q.B.177; 66 L.T.189;40W.R. 223;561.P. Oinoussian Virtue, The. See Schiffahrtsagentur Hamburg Middle East Line GmbH
389; 36 S.J. 79, 0.C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·204, 2·286 Hamburg v. Virtue Shipping Corp. Monrovia; Oinoussian Virtue, The
North Australian Territory Co., Re, Archer's Case [1892J 1 Ch. 322; 61 L.J.Ch. 129; Olanda The (1919] 2 K.B. 728 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . · 7·086
65 L.T. 800; 40 W.R. 212 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3·079 Old Gr~vebury Manor Farm v. Seymour (W.) Plant Sales and Hire (No. 2) [1979] l
North British Railway v. Wilson 1911 S.C. 738; 19111 S.L.T. 327. . . . . . . . . . . . 18·068 W.L.R. 1397; (1979) 123 S.J. 719; [1979] 3 All E.R. 504; (1979) 39 P. & C.R.
North West Metropolitan Regional Hospital Board v. Bickerton (T.A.) & Son Ltd. 99; (1979) 252 E.G. 1103, C.A.; affirming (1979) 38 P. & C.R 374 . . . . . . 14·058
[1970] 1 W.L.R.607; [1970] 1 AllE.R.1039; 114S.J.243; 68L.G.R.447,H.L.; Oldschool v. Gleesons (Construction) Ltd. (1976) 4 Build. L.R.103, O.C.... 1·311, 1·319
affirming sub nom. Bickerton & Son Ltd. v. Norton West Metropolitan One Hundred Simcoe Street v. Frank Burger Contractors [1968] 1 Ont. L.R. 452
Regional Hospital Board [1969] 1 All E.R. 977; 112 S.J. 922; 67 L.G.R. 83, (Canada) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·281, 17-023
C.A.; Reversing sub nom. Bickerton (T.A.) & Son v. North West Metropoli- Onerati v. PhillipsConstructionsPty. Ltd. ((Unrep.)May 12, 1989,N.S.W. Sup. Ct. 1·254
Ormes v. Beadel (1861) 2 Giff.166; 2De G.F. &J. 333;30 L.J.Ch. l; 2 L.T. 308;3 L.T.
tan Regional Hospital Board (1968) 66 L.G.R. 597; 207 E.G. 533.... 1·009, 1·220,
344; 6Jur.(N.s.) 550, 1103; 9 W.R. 25; 128 R.R. 77 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3·077
1·228, 2·144, 2·170, 2·175, 2·177, 4-060, 4-179, 4·190, 4·193, 4·194, 4-195,
Osborn v. Leggett (1930) S.A.S.R. 346.............................. 13·101
4·196, 7-007, 13·008, 13-012, 13·013, 13·036, 13·055, 13·061, 13·062, 13·066,
Osborne Panama S.A. v. Shell & B.P. South African Refineries [1980] 3 S.A. 653,
13·067, 13·069, 13-070, 13-071, 13-072, 13·073, 13-075, 13-076, 13-078, affirming [1982] 4.S.A. 890 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·322
13·080, 13·081, 13·082, 13-083, 13-084, 13-085, 13·086, 13·087, 13-088 OscarChessv. Williams [1957] 1 W.L.R.370; 101 S.J.186; [1957] 1 AllE.R.325; [101
North Western Salt Co. Ltd. v. Electrolytic Alkali Co. [1914J A.C. 461; 83 L.J.K.B. S.J. 292; 91 LL.T. 213; 73 L.Q.R. 144; 20 M.L.R. 410; [1958] C.L.J. 22]
530; 110 L.T. 852; 30 T.L.R. 313; 58 S.J. 338 4-278
C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·142
Osenton (Charles) & Co. v. Johnston [1942] A.C. 130; 110 L.J.K.B. 420; 165 L.T.
235; 57 T.L.R. 515; [1941] 2 All E.R. 245 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18· 104
Oshawa (The City of) v. Brennan Paving [1955] S.C.R. 76. . . . . . 6·096, 6·133, 6·149
 xciv TABLE OF CASES TABLE OF CASES xcv
Ottawa Northern and Western Railway Co. v. Dominion Bridge Co. (1905) 36 Payne v. Wheeldon (1954) 104 L.J. 844. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·262, 2-265
S.C.R. 347. · · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10·035 10·040 Peabody Donation Fund Governors v. Parkinson (Sir Lindsay) & Co. [1985] A.C.
Otto v. Bolton & Norris [1936] 2 K.B. 46; 105 L.J.K.B. 602; 154L.T. 717; 52 T.L.R. ' 210; [1984] 3 W.L.R. 953; [1984] 3 AIIE.R. 529; (1984) 128 S.J. 753; [1985] 83
438; 80S.J. 306; [1936] 1 All E.R. 960..................... . . 1·314, 1·316 LG.R. 1; (1984) 28 Build. L.R. 1; [1984) C.I.L.L. 128; (1984) 81 L.S. Gaz.
Overbrooke Estates Ltd. v. Glencombe Properties Ltd. [1974] 1 W.L.R. 1335; 3179, H.L.; affirming [1983] 3 W.L.R. 754; [1983] 3 AIIE.R. 417; (1983) 127
. [1974] 3 All E.R. 511; 118 S.J. 775 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·177 S.J. 749; (1984) 47 P. & C.R. 402; [1984] 82 L.G.R. 138; (1984) 25 Build. LR.
Owmt Homes Pty. Ltd. v. Mancuso unreported, Federal Court of Australia, 108, C.A.; [(1984-85) 1 Const. L.J.175] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·350, 1·359, 1·384
Queensland Registry, April 29, 1988: see (1988) 7 A.C.L.R. 358. . . . . 2·274, 2·280 Peachdart, Re [1984] Ch.131; [1983] 3 W.L.R. 878; (1983) 127 S.J. 839; [1983] 3 All
Oxford v. Provand (1868) L.R. 2 P.C. 135; 5 Moo. P.C.C.(N.s.) 150 . . . . . . . . . . 4·303 E.R. 204; (1984) 81 L.S. Gaz. 204. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11·053, 11·056
Peacock Construction Co. v. West (1965) 142 S.E. (2nd) 332...... 13·111, 13-112, 13·113
--v. Modem Air Conditioning (1977) 353 So. (2nd) 840 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13-112
Peak Construction (Liverpool) Ltd. v. McKinney Foundations Ltd. (1970) 69
P. & M. Kaye v. Hosier & Dickinson. See Kaye (P. & M.) v. Hosier & Dickinson LG.R. 1. . . . . 2·175, 8-059, 10·021, 10·026, 10·034, 10,036, 10·038, 10·040, 10·091A
Pacific Associates v. Baxter [1990] 1 Q.B. 993; [1989] 3 W.L.R.1150; (1989) 133 S.J. Pearce v. Brooks (1866) LR. 1 Ex. 213; 12 Jur. 342; 35 L.J.Ex. 213; 14 W.R. 614;
123; [1989] ~ All E.R. 159; 44 BLR 33; 16 Con. L.R. 90; (1989) New L.J. 41, 4 H. & C. 358; 14 L.T. 288 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·273
C.A.; affirming 13 Con. L.R. 80. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·130, 1·278, 1·288, - v . Tucker (1862) 3 F. & F. 136. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-082, 4·101, 4·107, 4·124
Pearce (C.J.) & Co. v. Hereford Corporation (1968) 66 L.G.R. 647. . . . . . . 2·138, 4-050,
1·290, 1·295, 1·296, 1·296A, 1·296B, 1·303, 1·305, 1·306, 1·306A, 1·306B, 1·325,
4·179, 7·007, 7·030
2·073, 2·221, 3·078, 4·200, 6-097, 6·111, 6·228, 7·027, 18·071, 18·047 Pearson & Son Ltd. v. Dublin Corporation [1907] A.C. 351 {1904--7] All E.R. Rep.
Page v. Llandaff and Dinas Powis Rural Council (1901) Hudson, (4th ed.) Vol. 2, 255; 77 L.J.P.C. 1; 97 L.T. 645. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1·165, 1·166, 2·232, 3·077
p. 316... · · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·119, 6·121, 6·142, 6·222 Pearson Bridge (N.S.W.) v. State Rail Authority of New South Wales (1982) 1
Paget v. Marshall (1884) 28 Ch.D. 255; 54 L.J.Ch. 575; 51 L.T. 351; 49 J.P. 85; 33 A.C.L.R. 81. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17·072,17·073, 17-075
W.R. 608 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·116 Pearson-Building v. Pioneer Grain Co. (1933) 1 W.W.R. 179 . . 8·125
Palgrave Gold Mining Co. v. McMillan [1892] A.C. 420 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·077 Peek v. Gurney (1873) L.R. 6 H.L. 377; 43 L.J.Ch. 19; 22 W.R. 29, H.L.; affirming
Panama and South Pacific Telegraph Co. v. India Rubber, etc. Co. (1875) L.R. 10 (1871) L.R. 13 Eq. 79 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . J.145
Ch. App. 515; 45 L.J.Ch. 121; 32 L.T. 517; 23 W.R. 585 ....... 2·233, 3·079, 6-109, Penn Bridge v. City ofNewOrleans 222F. 733 (1915), 5th Circuit, Court of Appeals 4·061
6· 128, 12·078 Penvidic Contracting Co. v. International Nickel of Canada [1975] 3 D.L.R. (3d)
Panamena Europea Navegacion (Compania Limitada) v. Frederick Leyland & Co. 748, Canada Supreme Ct. ......... 4-144, 4·148, 4·154, 4·168, 8·197, 8·198, 8·206
Ltd. See Compania Panamena Europea Navegacion v. Frederick Leyland & Pepper v. Burleigh (1792) 1 Peake N.P. 139; 3 RR. 665. . . ...... 7·084, 7·090
Co. Ltd. (J. Russell & Co.). Perar B.V. v. General Surety & Guarantee Co., (1994) 66 BLR 72, C.A., May
Pantalone v. Alaovie (1989) 18 N.S.W.L.R. 119, N.S.W. Supreme Ct ....... 5·060, 8·108, 1994. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16·022, 16·047, 16·056, 17·012A
Percy Bilton Ltd. v. Greater London Council [1982] 1 W.L.R. 794 . . . . . . . . . . . 13-074
8·136 Percival v. Dunn (1885) 29 Ch.D. 128; 54 L.J.Ch. 570; 52 L.T. 320 . . . . . . . . . . . 14·048
Pao On v. Lau Yiu Lang [1980] A.C. 614; [1979] 3 W.L.R. 435; [1979] 3 AllE.R. 65;
--v. London City Council Asylums (1918) 87 L.J.Q.B. 677 . . . . . . . 3·073
(1979) 123 S.J. 319, P.C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·068, 1·077
Perini Corporation v. Commonwealth of Australia (1969) 12Build. L.R. 82, N.S.W.
Paramatta.City Council v. Lutz [1988] 12 N.S.W.L.R. 293 .......... 8·108, 8·136, 8·143 Sup. Ct. [1969} 2 N.S.W.R. 530. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·188, 4-197, 4-201, 6·097, 6·115,
Parker Games & Co. Ltd. v. Turpin [1918] 1 K.B. 358 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-121 6·132, 6·133, 6·145, 6-151, 6-168, 8·054, 8·199, 8·206, 10·078, 10·079, 10-087
Parkinson (Sir Lindsay) & Co. Ltd. v. Commissioners of His Majesty's Works and Perini Pacific v. Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Dr_ainage District (1966) 57
Public Buildings [1949] 2 K.B. 632; [1950] 1 All E.R. 208; [210 L.T. 25; 100 D.L.R. (2d) 307................. 8·221, 10·024, 10·025, 10,036, 10·038, 10·040
L.J. 677], C.A.; affirming [1948J W.N. 446; 93 S.J. 27. . . . . . . . 1·271, 3·045, 4·262, Perl (P.) (Exporters) v. Camden London Borough Council [1984] Q.B. 342; [1983]
7·090, 8·075, 8·219 3 W.L.R. 769; [1983] 127 S.J. 581; (1980) 80 L.S.Gaz. 2216, C.A. . . . . . . . 1·321
Parle v. Leistikow (1883) 4 N.S.W.L.R. 84 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10·033 Perryv. Phillips (Sidney) & Son (A Firm) [1982] 1 W.L.R.1297; (1982) 126S.J. 626;
Parsons v. Sexton (1847) 4 C.B. 899; 16 L.J.C.P. 181; 2 C. & K. 266; 11 Jur. 849; 149 [1982] 3 All E.R. 705; (1983) 22 Build. L.R.120; (1982) 263 E.G. 888; (1982)
R.R. 822. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·011, 6-024 79 L.S. Gaz. 1175, C.A.; reversing [1982] 1 All E.R. 1005; [1981] 260 E.G.
--v. Way and Waller [1952} C.P.L. 417; 159 E.G. 524. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·203, 2·204 389................ 2·207, 2·209, 2-210, 2-211, 8·141, 8·149, 8·150, 8·160, 8·188
Parsons (H.) (Livestock) v. Uttley Ingham & Co. [1978] Q.B. 791; [1977] 3 W.L.R. - v. Sharon Development Co. [1937] 81 S.J. 1021; 4 All E.R. 390. . . . . . . 4-078, 4·105
990; (1977) 121 S.J. 811; [1978] 1 All E.R. 525; [1977] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 522, - v . Stopher [1959] 1 W.L.R. 415; 103 S.J. 311; [1959] 1 AIIE.R. 713... 18·169, 18·178,
C.A. - .. · · - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·110 18·192
Parsons Bros. Ltd. v. Shea (1965) 53 D.L.R. (2d) 86 .............. 1-068, 1·264 4-255 - - v. Tendering District Council; Thurbon v. Same (1984) 30 Build. L.R. 118;
Partington Advertising Co. v. Willing & Co. (1896) 12 T.L.R. 176 . . . . . . . . . . . ll-016 [1985] 1 E.G.L.R. 260; [1985] C.I.L.L. 145; (1984) 1 Const. L.J. 152; (1984)
Partington & Son (Builders) v. Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council (1985) 3 Con. L.R. 74 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2· 151
2 Const. L.J. 67; (1985) 5 Con. L.R. 99; [1985] C.I.L.L. 213; (1985) 32 Build. Peterlin v. Allen (1975) 49 A.L.J.R. 239 . . . . . . . . . . . 1·107
Peters v. Quebec Harbour Commissioners (1891) 19 Can. S.C. (Duval) 685 . . . . 6·016,
L.R. 150 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·063
Paskby v. Birmingham Corporation (1856) 18 C.B. 2; 107 R.R. 176........ 6-161, 6·187 6·096, 6·129, 6-144, 6·149, 6·151
Pethick Brothers v. Metropolitan Water Board Hudson Building Contracts (4th
Paterson v. Gand~sequi (1812) 15 East 62; 13 R.R. 368 ............... 13·031, 13·110 ed.), Vol. 2, p. 456, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·044
Patman & Fothermgham Ltd. v. Pilditch (1904) (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 368. . . . . 8·022, 8·023 Petrie v. Hunter (1882) 2 Ont. Rep. 233 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-217, 17-017
Pauling v. Dover Corporation (1855) 10 Ex. 753; 24 L.J.Ex. 128; 102 R.R. Petrofina S.A. of Brussels v. Compagnia Italiana (1937) 53 T.L.R. 650; 42 Com. Cas.
811. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12·034, 12·035 286. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-014, 5·057, 6·052, 6·055, 6·056, 6·058, 6-059
- - v. Pontifex (1852) 20 L.T.(o.s.) 126; 2 Saund. & M. 59; 16 J.P. 792; 1 W.R. Petrofina(U.K.) v. Magnaload [1984] Q.B.127; [1983]3 W.L.R. 805; (1983) 127 S.J.
64 · · .... · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-053 729; [1983] 3 All E.R. 35; [1983] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 91; (1984) 25 Build. L.R. 37;
Pavey & Matthews v. Paul (1987) 162 C.L.R. 221, High Court of Australia . . . . . 1·268, (1983) 80 L.S. Gaz. 2677. . . . . . . . . . . ................ 15·009, 15·060
1·269, 1·270, 4·274, 4-282, 7-076, 8·104 Petty v. Cooke (1871) L.R. 6 Q.B. 790; 40 L.J.Q.B. 281; 25 L.T. 90; 19 W.R. 1112. 17·024
Pawley v. Turnbull (1861) 3 Giff. 70; L.T. 672; 7 Jur.(N.s.) 792; 133 R.R. 20 .... Y· 6·096, Peyman v. Lanjani [1985] Ch. 457; [1985] 2 W.L.R.154; [1984] 3 AIIE.R. 703; (1984)
6-128,6·143 128 S.J. 853; (1984) 48 P. & C.R. 398; (1985) 82 L.S. Gaz. 43, C.A. . . . . . . 1-146
 xcvi TABLE OF CASES TABLE OF CASES xcvii
Philadelphia Ry. v. Howard (1851) 13 How. (U.S.) 307 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-068 Porter v. Hannah Builders [1969] E.R. 673 ... 4·305, 12·001, 12,089, 12·091, 12·095, 12·097
Philips (Hong Kong) Ltd. v. Att.-Gen. of Hong Kong (1993) 61 BLR 41. . . . . . . 10·019, --v. Tottenham Urban District Council [1915] 1 K.B. 776; 84 L.J.K.B.1041; 112
10·060, 10·061 L.T. 711; 79 J.P. 169; 31 T.L.R. 97; 13 L.G.R. 216....... 4·165, 4-167, 4·168, 4·175
Philips v. Ward [1956] 1 W.L.R. 471; 100 S.J. 317; [1956] 1 All E.R. 874..... 2-206, 2·207, Portsmouth, The [1912] A.C. 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . 13· 100
2·209, 2·210, 2·2.1,1, 8·117, 8·128, 8·132, 8·145, 8·146 Portuguese Plastering Contractors (Pty.) v. Bytenski 1956 (4) S.A. 812. . . . . . . . 6·157
Phillips v. Alhambra Palace Co. [1901] 1 K.B. 59; 70 LJ.K'.B. 26; 83 L.T. 431; 44 Patton Homes v. Coleman Contractors (Overseas) (1984) 128 SJ. 282; (1984) 28
W.R. 223 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·270, 14·072 Build. L.R.19; (1984) 81 L.S. Gaz.1044, C.A....... 17·072, 17-073, 17·074, 17·075
--v. Britannia Laundry [1923] 1 K.B. 539 ........ , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·387 Poucher v. Treahey (1875) 37 U.C.Q.B. 367 . , . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17·017
- v . Brooks Ltd. [1919} 2 K.B. 243; [1918-19} All E.R. Rep. 246; 88 L.J.K.B. 953; Powell v. Evan-Jones & Co. [1905] 1 K.B. 11; 74 L.J.K.B. 115; 92 L.T. 430; 53 W.R.
121 L.T. 249; 35 T.L.R. 470; 24 Com. Cas. 263 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·098 277; 10 Com. Cas. 36; 21 T.L.R. 55. . . . . . . 3·079
Phillips Products v. Hyland [1987] 1 W.L.R. 659; (1987] 2 All E.R. 620; (1985) 129 Powell River Paper Co. v. Wells Construction [1912] 2 D.L.R. 340 . . . . . . . 17·012
S.J. 47; (1988) 4 Const. L.J. 53; [1985] Tr. L. 98; (1985) 82 L.S. Gaz. 681, C.A. 1·241 Pratt v. St. Albert Protestant Separate School District No. 6. (1969) 5 D.L.R. (3d)
Phipps v. Edinburgh Ry. (1843) 5 D. (Ct. of Sess. Cas.) 1025 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,127 451, Supreme Ct.; affirmed Supreme Ct. of Canada (1969) 7 D.L.R. (3d)
Photo Production Ltd. v. Securicor Transport Ltd. [1980] A.C. 827; [1980] 2 W.L.R. 560 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-158
283; [1980] 1 All E.R. 556; (1980) 124 S.J. 147; [1980] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 545, --v. Swanmore Builders and Baker [1980} 2 Lloyd's Rep. 504. . . . . . . 18·077, 18·135,
H.L.;reversing[1978] 1 W.L.R.856; [1978] 3 AllE.R.146; (1978) 122S.J.315; 18·146, 18·147, 18·155, 18·158
[1978] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 172, C.A.................... 1·231, 1,232, 1·233, 4·227 Pratt (Valerie) v. Hill (George) (a firm) (1987) 38 Build. L.R. 25, C.A.. . . . . 1·130, 2·166
Pickering v. Ilfracombe Ry. (1868) L.R. 3 C.P. 235; 37 L.J.C.P. 118; 17 L.T. 650; 16 Prenn v. Simmonds [1971] 1 W.L.R.1381; [1971] 3 All E.R. 237; 115 S.J. 654, H.L. 1·216
W.R. 458. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·206, 6·207, 14·046 President of India v. La Pintada Compania Navigacion S.A. [1985] A.C. 104; [1984]
--v. Sogex Services (U.K.) Ltd. (1982) 263 E.G. 770; (1982) 20 Build. L.R. . . . 2·267 3 W.L.R.10; (1984) 128S.J. 414; (1984] 2AllE.R. 773; [1984} 2Lloyd'sRep.
Pierce v. Dyke [1952] 2 W.L.R. 30 (Jamaica). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·066, 18.()69 9; [1984] C.I.L.L.110; [1984] L.M.C.L.Q.365; (1984) 81 L.S. Gaz.1999, H.L.;
Pierce (Fred.) v. Troke (1957) 8 D.L.R. (2d) 5 4·020 reversing [1984] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 305, D.C.. . . . . . . . . . 8·088, 8·092, 8·093, 18·010
Piggott v. Townsend (1926) 27 S.R. (N.S.W.) 25 ...... 6·063, 6·071, 6-093, 10·069, 12·045 Prestige & Co. Ltd. v. Brettell, 55 T.L.R. 59; 82 S.J. 929; [1938] 4 All E.R.
Pigott Construction v. W.J. Crowe Ltd. (1961) 27 D.L.R. 258. ...... 4·147, 4·148, 4·158, 346. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·067, 6·072, 6·091
4·214, 9·003, 12·050, 12-080, 13·134 Price v. Strange [1978] 1 Ch. 337; [1977) 3 W.L.R. 943; (1977) 121 S.J. 816; [1977] 3
Pigott Structures v. Keillor Construction Co. (1965) 50 D.L.R. (2d) 97 (Canada) . 1·028, All E.R. 371; (1978) 36 P. & C.R. 59; (1977) 243 E.G. 295, C.A. . . . . . . . . 4·301
1,029, 3·058 Price (S.J. & M.M.) v. Milner (1968) 206 E.G. 313. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-182, 4·210, 7·092
Pillar P.G. v. Higgins (D.J.) Construction (1986) 10 Con. L.R. 46; (1986) 2 Const. Priestley v. Stone (1888), 4th ed., Vol. 2, p. 134; 4 T.L.R. 730 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·111
L.J. 223; (1986) 34 Build. L.R. 43, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·199 Prince Albert (The City of) v. Underwood and Mclellan & Associates (1969) 3
Pillings (C.M.) & Co. v. Kent Investments (1985) Build. L.R. 8.0; (1985) 1 Const. L.J. D.L.R. (3d) 385 ................ 2·093, 2·097, 2·139, 2· 182, 2· 184, 2· 192, 4·056,
393; [1985] C.I.L.L. 181, C.A.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·222, 6·006, 6·213 8·224, 14·034, 15·007
"Pine Hill", The. See Halifax Overseas Freighters v. Rasno Export; Technopromin- Prince Albert Pulp Co. v. Foundation Co. of Canada (1976) 68 D.L.R. (3d)
port; and Polskie Linie Oceaniczne P.P.W. The "Pine Hill." 283.. . ........... 5·057, 6-017, 6·046, 6·057
Pinnel's Case (1602) 5 Co. Rep. 117a; [1558-1774] All E.R. Rep. 612; 77 E.R. 237; Printing Machinery Co. v. Linotype and Machinery Ltd. [1912] 1 Ch. 566; 81 L.J.Ch.
sub nom. Penny v. Care Moore K.B. 677 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·074 422; 106 L. T. 743; 28 T.L.R. 224; 56 S.J. 271. ................. 18·099, 18·100
Pinnock Brothers v. Lewis & Peat Ltd. [1923} 1 K.B. 690 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·048 Pritchett and Gold and Electrical Power Storage Co. v. Currie [1916] 2 Ch. 515; 85
Pinto Leite & Nephews, Re, ex parte Des Olivaes (Visconde) [1929] 1 Ch. 221; 98 L.J.Ch. 753; 115 L.T. 325 ............... 11·009, 11·054, 11·062, 13·039, 13·132
L.J.Ch. 211; 140 L.T. 587; [1928] B. & C.R. 188 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14·052 Promenade Investments v. State of New South Wales (1992) 26 N.S.W.L.R.
Pioneer Shipping v. B.T.P. Tioxide; Nema, The [1982) A.C. 724; [1981] 3 W.L.R. 203................ . .. 18·005, 18·022, 18·174
292; (1981) 125 S.J. 542; (1981] 2 All E.R.1030; [1981] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 239; Property Investments (Development) v. Byfield Building Services (1985) 31 Build.
[1981] Com. L.R. 197; H.L.; affirming [1980] Q.B. 547; [1980] 3 W.L.R. 326; L.R. 47.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·115, 18·122, 18·196
[1980] 3 All E.R. 117; sub nom. B.T.P. Tioxide v. Pioneer Shipping and Prosser v. Edmonds (1835) 1 Y. & C. (Ex.) 481; 160 E.R.196 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14·024
Armada Marine S.A.; Nema, The [1980} 2 Lloyd's Rep. 339, C.A.; reversing Provident Accident v. Dahne & White [1937] 2 E.R. 255 . . . . 17·023
[1980] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 83. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·236, 4-259, 18·004, Public Works Commissioner v. Hills [1906] A.C. 368; 75 L.J.P.C. 69; 94 L.T.
18·005, 18·011, 18·017, 18·022, 18·044, 18·062, 18·115, 18·120, 18·151, 18·159A, 833. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10·006, 10,012
18·173, 18·174, 18·175, 18·176, 18·177, 18·181, 18·194, 18·195, 18·199 Purity Dairy Ltd. v. Collinson (1966) 57 W.W.R. 737; (1966) 58 D.L.R. (2d) 67,
Pirelli General Cable Works v. Faber (Oscar) & Partners [1983] 2 A.C. 1; [1983] 2 Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·247
W.L.R. 6; (1983) 127 S.J.16; [1983] 1 AUE.R. 65; (1983)265 E.G. 979; (1983) Purser & Co. (Hillingdon) Ltd. v. Jackson [1977] Q.B. 166; [1976] 3 W.L.R. 700;
133 New L.J. 63, H.L.; reversing (1982) 263 E.G. 879, C.A.. . . . . . . . 1·348, 1·349, [1976] 3 All E.R. 641; (1976) 242 E.G. 689; 120 S.J. 351. . . . . . . . . . . 1·252, 1·253
1·360, 2·084, 2·110, 2·222, 4·288 Pye v. British Automobile Commercial Syndicate [1906] 1 K.B. 425;75 L.J.K.B. 270;
Pitcaithly & Co. v. Mclean & Son (1911) 31 N.Z.L.R. 648 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.074 22 T.L.R. 257 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.012
Pitchers Ltd. v. Plaza (Queensbury), 162 L.T.213; 56T.L.R. 257; 84S.J. 76; [1940] 1 Pyrok Industries v. Chee Tat Engineering Co., 41 BLR 124........ 2·119, 6·160, 10-076
All E.R. 151. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18· 121, 18· 122
Planch6 v. Colborn (1831) 8 Bing.14; 1 L.J.C.P. 7; 1 Moo. & Sc. 51;5 C. & P. 58; 34
R.R. 613 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8· 104 Qantas Airways Ltd. v. Joseland and Gilling (1987) 3 Const. L.J. 299, New South
Platt v. Parker (1866) 2 T.L.R. 786. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9·016, 12·050, 12·051, 12.()53 Wales Supreme Ct. Ct. of Appeal. . . . . .... 5·039, 18·174
Plimsaul v. Lord Kilmorey (1884) 1 T.L.R. 48. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·072, 2·288 Queen, The v. Ron Engineering. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .............. 8·047, 8·048
Plucis v. Fryer (1967) 41 A.L.J.R. 192. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-038, 18·041 --v. Walter Cabott Construction Ltd. [1975} 69 D.L.R. (3d) 54 . . . . . . . . 1·155
Pompe v. Fuchs (1876) 34 L.T. 800 . . . . 18·048 Queen in the Right of Ontario v. Ron Engineering and Construction Eastern Ltd.
Pontifex v. Wilkinson (1845) 1 C.B. 75; 2 C.B. 349. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·032, 4·216 [1981] 1 S.C.R.111; (1981) 119 D.L.R. (3d) 267... 1·019, 1-025, 1·030, 1·058, 1·108
Port Glasgow Magistrates v. Scottish Construction Co., 1960 S.L.T. 319. . . . 6·016, 6·087, Queensland Construction Ltd. v. Commonwealth (1985) 4 A.C.L.R. 94 1·159
10,(170, 10·074 Queensland Gov't Rly. v. Manufacturer's Mutual Insurance (1968) 118 C.L.R.
Port Line v. Ben Line Steamers [1958] 2Q.B.146; [1958] 2 W.L.R. 551; 102 S.J. 232; 314. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15·031, 15-032
[1958] 1 All E.R. 787; [1958] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 290 .................., 4·234 Quercetti v. Tranquilli [1941] 4 D.L.R. 63 . . . . . . . 14·065
Port of Melbourne Authority v. Anshun Pty. Ltd. (1981) 147 C.L.R. 589, High
Court of Australia 326 A.L.R. 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·250 R. v. Architects' Registration Tribunal, ex parte Jaggar [1945] 2 All E.R. 131. 2·012, 2·007
xcviii TABLE OF CASES TABLE OF CASES xcix

R. v. Breeze [1973] 1 W.L.R. 994; [1973] 2All E.R.1141; (1973] Crim. L.R. 458;sub Rees v. Lines (1837) 8 C. & P. 126. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·032, 4-216
nom. Architects Registration Council v. Breeze, 117 S.J. 284; 57 Cr. App. R. Rees Hough Ltd. v. Redland Reinforced Plastics Ltd. (1985) 27 Build. L.R. 136;
654, C.A.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·013, 2·019 (1984} C.I.L.L. 84; (1984) Const. L.J. 67; (1984) 134 New LJ. 706. . . . . . . 1·240
- - v. Commissioners of Sewers for Essex (1885) 14 Q.B.D. 561 . . . . . . . . . . . 4·265 Rees and Kirby v. Swansea City Council (1985) 30 Build. L.R.1; (1985) 129 S.J. 622;
- - v. Enfield London Borough Council ex parte T.F. Un win (Roy don) 46 BLR 1; (1985] C.I.L.L.188; (1985) 1 Const. L.J. 378; (1985) 5 Con. L.R. 34; (;985) 82
[1989] C.0.D. 466; (1989} 1 Admin. L.R. 51; (1989} 153 L.G. Rev. 890, L.S. Gaz. 2905, C.A.; reversing in part (1984) 128 S.J. 46; (1984) 35 Bwld. L.R.
D.C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3·082 129. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·258, 8·071, 8·093, 8·096
- - v. Henrickson & Knutson (1911} 13 C.L.R. 473 ....... : . . . . . . . . . . . . 15·061 Reeves v. Barlow (1884) 12 Q.B.D. 436; 53 L.J.Q.B. 192; 50 L.T. 782; 82 W.R.
--v. London Borough of Enfield, ex parteT.F. Un win (Roydon). See R. v. Enfield 672. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11·026, 11·027, 11·028, 11·029, 11·035, 11·041, 11·046
London Borough Council ex parteT.F. Unwin (Roydon) Reg:Glass v. Rivers Locking Systems Pty. (1968) 120 C.L.R. 516 Australia High Ct. 4·089
- - v. London Borough of Islington ex parte Building Employer's Confederation Reid v. Batte (1829) Moo. & M. 413 . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-093
[1989] IRLR 382; 45 BLR 45 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3·082 - v . Macbeth (1904] A.C. 223; 73 L.J.P.C. 57; 90 L.T. 422; 20 T.L.R. 316; 6 F.
- - v. Ontario Tobacco Growers Marketing Board, ex parte Grigg [1965] 2 O.R. (H.L.) 25 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .- . . . . . . . . . . . . 11·009, 11·012, 11·040
411 (Canada) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·105 Reigate v. Union Manufacturing Co. (Ramsbottom) [1918] 1 K.B. 592; [1918--19]
--v. Paradis and Farley Inc. [1942] S.C.R. 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·168, 4-050, 4·052 All E.R. Rep. 143; 87 L.J.K.B. 724; 118 L.T. 479, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . 1·180, 1·184
1
i:t~e~82.~t~}t
=i:(3d) I~!s{~~;i'a~L~1'. lii11\ 69 T:L.R: (3d) 54i; (i964j 440:L:RC:0 ' ' 2 7 044

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·143, 4·145, 4-148, 4·154, 4·155

Reilly (J.M.) Ltd. v. Belfast Corporation (June 28, 1968, Unrep.). . . . . . . . 4·193, 13·073
Renard Constructions (M.E.) Pty. Ltd. v. Minister of Public Works (1992) 26
N.S.W.L.R. 234. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·197, 1·198, 1·199, 1·272, 12--025, 12·083
- - v. Watson (1976) 9 A.L.R. 551. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·147, 18·164 Restal Drilling Co. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue 127 F. (2nd) 355 . . . . . 3·027
R.I.C.S. v. Shepheard [1947] E.G., May 31 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·033 Reynolds v. Atherton (1921) 125 L.T. 690; affirmed (1922) 127 L.T. 189; sub nom.
Radford v. De Froberville (Lange third party) [1977] 1 W.L.R.1262subnom. Rad- Atherton v. Reynolds 66 S.J. 404, H.L. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·031
ford v. De Froberville [1978] 1 AllE.R. 33; (1977)121 S.J. 319; (1977) 35 P. & 1·280
Rhosina, The (1884) 10 P.O. 24
C.R. 316; (1977) 7 Build. L.R. 35 .... 2·207, 5·061, 8·130, 8·132, 8·135, 8·136, 8·141, Rich v. Pierpont (1862) 3 F. & F. 35; 130 R.R. 806 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·086
8·149, 8·153 Richard Roberts Holdings Ltd. v. Douglas Smith Stimson Partnership (No. 2)
Raffles v. Wichelhaus (1864) 2 H. & C. 906; 33 L.J.Ex. 160; 159 E.R. 375 .... 1·099, 1·101 (1988) 46 BLR 50; 22 Con. L.R. 69. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·119, 8·143
Rainer (John) & Co. v. U.S. 325 F. 2nd 438 (1963) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12·015, 12·016 Richards v. May (1883) 10 Q.B.D. 400; 52 L.J.Q.B. 272; 31 W.R. 708. . . . . 6-011, 6·015,
Ralph M. Lee-Ltd. v. Gardner & Naylor Industries, February 11, 1993 (Unrep.).. 8·211A, 6·049, 7·065, 7·100
18·1590 Richards (Michael) Properties v. Corporation of Wardens of St. Saviour's Parish,
Ramac Construction Co. v. J.E. Lesser (Properties) Ltd. [1975] 2 Lloyd's Rep. Southwark [1975] 3 All E.R. 416. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·049, 1·057, 3·056, 3·059, 3·060
430. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·007, 6°075, 6·087, 10·041, 10·077, 10·095, 18·092 Richardson v. Beale (1867) The Times, June 29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·069
Ramada Development Co. v. U.S. Fidelity and Guaranty Co. (1980) 626 F. (2d) --v. Buckinghamshire County Council, 115 S.J. 249; (1971) 69 L.G.R. 327; sub
517 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17·047
nom. Richardson v. Buckinghamshire County Council, Sydney Green (Civil
Ramsay v. Brand (1898) 25 R. (Ct. of Sess.) 1212; 35 Sc. L.T. 927 . . . . . . . . . . . 6·015
Engineering), and Roads Reconstruction (Contracting) [1971] l Lloyd's
Ramsden and Carr v. Chessum & Sons (1913) llOL.T. 274; 78J.P.49;58 S.J. 66;30
Rep. 533, C.A.; reversing (1970) 68 L.G.R. 662 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15·056
T.L.R 68. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.037, 13·039
Ramsgate Victoria Hotel Co. v. Montefiore; Ramsgate Victoria Hotel Co. v. Gold- --v. Dumfriesshire Road Trustees (1890) 17 Sess. Cas. 805, Scotland....... 4-172
smid (1866) L.R.1 Ex.109;4H. & C.164; 13 L.T. 715;35 L.J.Ex. 90; 14 W.R. - v . Silvester(1873) L.R. 9 Q.B. 34;43 L.J.Q.B.1;29L.T. 395;22 W.R. 74;38J.P.
335; [1861-73] All E.R. Rep. Ext. 2232; 13 L.T. 715; 12Jur.(N.s.) 455 .. 1·028, 3·068 628. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 ·020, 3·075
Randall v. Trimen (1856) 18C.B. 786;25L.J.C.P. 307;27L.T.(o.s.)57, 173; 107R.R. Rickards (Charles) v. Oppenheim [1950] 1 K.B. 616; 66 T.L.R. (Pt. 1) 435; 94 S.J.
516. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·080, Z.082 161; [1950] 1 All E.R 420, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·258, 9·011, 9·022
Ranger v. Great Western Rly. Co. (1854) 5 H.L.C. 72; 24 L.T.(o.s.) 22; 18Jur. 795; Ricker v. Fairbanks (1855) 40 Me. 43 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,068
3 Rail. Cas. 298; 101 R.R. 46 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·029, 6·033, 6·099, 6·102, 6·104, Rigge v. Burbridge (1846) 15 L.J.Ex. 309; 15 M. & W. 598; 4 Dav. & L. 1; 153
6-105, 6-140, 10·008, 12·082, 18·128 E.R. 988. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·253, 5·008
Rapid Bu~lding Group Ltd. v. Ealing Family Housing Association Ltd. (1984) 24 Rimmer v. Liverpool City Council [1985] Q.B.1; [1984] 2 W.L.R. 426; [1984] 1 All
Budd. L.R. 5, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10·025, 10,038, 10·040, 10·065 E.R. 930; (1984) 128 SJ. 225; (1984) 47 P. & C.R. 516; (1984) 269 E.G. 319;
RasboraLtd. v. J.C.L. Marine Ltd.; Atkinson v. J.C.L. Marine Ltd. [1977] 1 Lloyd's (1984) 82 L.G.R. 424; (1984) 12 H.L.R. 23; (1984) 81 L.S. Gaz. 664,
Rep. 645, D.C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·241 C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·321, 1 ·363
Rashleigh v. South Eastern Railway (1851) 10 C.B. 612; 84 R.R. 725 . . . . . . . . . 4-250 Ripley v. Lordon (1860) 2 L.T. 154; 6 Jur. 1078 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-012
Rawlings, ex parte; re Davis (No. 3) (1888) 22 Q.B.D. 193; 37 W.R. 203; 5 T.L.R. - v . M'Clure (1849) 4 Ex.Ch. 345; 18 LJ.Ex. 419; 14 L.T.(o.s.) 180 4·227
119 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . 14·037 Riverlate Properties Ltd. v. Paul [1975} Ch. 133; [1974] 3 W.L.R. 564; (1974] 2 All
- - v. General Trading Co. [1921] 1 K.B. 635; 90 L.J.K.B. 404; 124 L.T. 562; 26 E.R. 656; 28 P. & C.R 220;sub nom. Riverplate Properties v. Paul, 118 S.J.
Com. Cas. 171; 65 S.J. 220; 37 T.L.R. 252 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . J.080 644, C.A.; affirming (1973) E.G. 333. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·116, 1·122
Rayack Construction Ltd. v. Lampeter Meat Co. Ltd. (1979) 12 Build. L.R Roach (or Rouch) v. Great Western Ry. (1841) 1 Q.B. 51; lOL.J.Q.B. 89;4 P. & D.
30.. ·.... : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·084, 8·085, 8·086, 14·045, 16·058 686; 2 Rail. Cas. 505; 5 Jur.(o.s.) 826; 55 R.R. 203. . . . . . . . 12·063, 12·064
Reardon Smith Lme v. Hansen-Tangen; Hansen-Tangen v. Sanko Steamship Co.; Robbins v. Myers Trading Post 117 S.E. (2nd) 438 (1960) . . . 3·027
Diana Prosperity, The [1976] 1 W.L.R. 989; 120 S.J. 719; [1976] 3 All E.R. Roberts Re. [1900] 1 Q.B. 122 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16·059
750; [1976] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 621, H.L. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·216 --v. BuryCommissioners(1870) L.R. 4C.P. 755;L.R. 5 C.P. 310;39L.J.C.P.129;
Redland Bricks Ltd. v. Morris [1970} A.C. 652; [1969} 2 W.L.R. 1437; [1969] 2 All 22 L. T. 132; 34 J.P. 821; 18 W.R. 702 ...... 1·187, 4·146, 4·176, 6-013, 6·015, 6-027,
E.R. 576; 113 S.J. 405, H.L.; reversing sub nom. Morris v. Redland Bricks 6·114, 6·115, 6·117, 10°030, 10·031, 10·034,
Ltd. [1967] 1 W.L.R. 967; [1967] 3 All E.R.1; 111 S.J. 373, C.A...... 1·343, 4-304 10·070, 10·091, 12·063, 12·078, 12-079, 12·081
Redmond v. Wynne (1892) 13 N.S.W. Rep. (Law) 39...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·106 - v . Davey (1833) 4 B. & Ad. 664; 1 N. & M.443;2L.J.K.B.141;38 R.R. 348 . 12,031
Redpath Doorman Long v. Cummins Engine Company [1982J S.L.T. 489, Ct. of --v. Havelock (1832) 3 B. & Ad. 404; 37 R.R. 452......... 4·016, 4·018, 4·032, 4.033
Sess. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·222, 6·202, (i:21.4, 12-057 - v . Smith (1859) 4 H. & N. 315; 28 L.J.Ex. 164; 32 L.T. 320; 118 R.R. 462 . . . 2·248
Reed Publishing Holdings v. King's Reach Investments Ltd. (Unrep.) May 25, 19&3, - v . Watkins(1863) 14C.B.(N.s.) 592;32LJ.C.P.291;8L.T.460; 11 W.R. 783; 10
C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14·059, 14·060, 14·062 Jur.(N.s.)128;2N.R.246;135R.R.827 . . 6·153
 c TABLE OF CASES TABLE OF CASES ci
Roberts (A.) & Co. Ltd. v. Leicestershire C.C. [1961] Ch. 555; [1961] 2 W.L.R. 1000; Rum belows Ltd. v. A.M.K. (A Firm) and Firesnow Sprinkler Installations (1982) 19
105 S.J. 425; [1961] 2 All E.R. 545; 59 L.G.R. 349. . . . . . 1·113, 1-121, 1-122, 2·065. Build. L.R. 25. . . . . . . . . . . . 1·327, 4·108, 4·122, 4-125, 13·043
. 3·052 Rumput (Panama) S.A. v. Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines, The League
Robms v. Goddard [1905] 1 K.B. 294; 74 L.J.K.B. 167; 92 L.T. 10; 21 T.L.R. [1984] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 259. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14·038, 18·122, 18·125
120... · · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5·053, 6-002, 6·063, 6-067, 6,069, 6-070, 6-071, Rushbrook v. O'Sullivan [190811 Ir. R. 232 . . . . . 4-303
. . 6·091, 6-093, 6·182 Russell v. Russell (1880) 14 Ch.D. 471; 49 LJ.Ch. 263; 42 L.T.112.. 18·102
R obmson v. Davison (1871) L.R. 6 Ex. 269; 40 L.J.Ex. 172· 24 L.T 755- 19 WR - - v. Viscount Sa da Bandeira (1862) 13 C.B.(N.s.) 149; 9 Jur.(N.s.) 718; 32
1036 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '. ..... · ... •.... .°. : 4-271 L.J.C.P. 68; 7 L.T. 804. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·182, 6"')12, 7·063, 7-064, 7·093, 10·029,
--v. Evans Brothers [1969] V.R. 885 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .- . . . . . . . . . . . . 15·010 10·032, 10·035, 10·040
- v. Harman (1848) 1 Exch. 850........ 8·110, 8·114, 8·130, 8·170, 8·172, 8·173, 8-191 Ruxley Electronics and Construction v. Forsyth [199411 W.L.R. 650, December 16,
- - v. Owen Sound (Corporation of) (1888) 16 Ont Rep. 121. . . . . . . . . . . 6-161 6-176 1993,C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S.136,8·142,8·153
Robson v. Drummond (1831) 2 B. &_Ad. 303; 9 L.J.(o.s.) K.B. 187; 36 R.R. ' Ryde v. Bushell [19671 E.A. 817. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·265, 10·042
569. · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-007 14·008 Rylands v. Fletcher (1868) L.R 3 H.L. 330; [1861~73] All E.R. Rep. 1; 37 L.J.Ex.
Rogersie{/arteCollinsRe. [1894) 1 Q.B.425;63L.J.Q.B.178; 10 R469; 70L.T.107; ' 161; 19 LT. 220; 33 J.P. 70, H.L.; affirming sub nom. Fletcher v. Rylands
anson 387 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16·060 (1866) L.R. 1 Exch. 265; 4 H.C.C. 263; 35 L.J.Ex. 154; 14 L.T. 523; 30J.P. 436;
- - v. East Suffolk County Council [1953] Q.B.D., R. No. 269 (Unrep.) : : : : : : 7·029 12 Jur.(N.s.) 603; 14 W.R. 799, Ex. Ch. . . . . 1·274, 1·310, 1·315, 1·337, 1·338, 4·265
- v. James (1891) 4th ed., Vol. 2, p. 172; 56 J.P. 277; 8 T.L.R. 67 . . . . . . . . 2·215, 6·216
Rolls Razor Ltd. v. Cox[1967] 1 Q.B.552; [1967]2 W.L.R.241; llOS.J. 943; [1967) 1
All E.R. 397; [1966) C.L.Y. 641, C.A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16·015 16·019 S.C.M. (United Kingdom) Ltd. v. Whittall (W.J.) & Son Ltd. [1971] 1 Q.B. 337;
Roscorla v. Thomas (1842) 3 Q.B. 234; 2 Gal. & Dav. 508· 11 L.J .Q.B 214· 6 Jur 929· ' [1970] 3 W.LR 694; [1970] 3AllE.R 245; 114S.J. 706, C.A.;affirming[1970]
114 E.R. 496 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '... . ' . ' 1·068 1 W.L.R. 1017; [1970] 2AllE.R. 417; 114 S.J. 268; 8 K.I.R. 1073; [86 L.Q.R.
Rose (Frederick E.) (London) Ltd v. Pimm (William H.),.r~i~r·&
2 Q.B. 450; [1953] 3 W.L.R. 497; [1953] 2 All E.R. 739, 97 S.J. 556; [1953] 2
eo: Ltd [i953j 455; 115 SJ. 255]..
S.L. Sethia Liners v. Naviagro Maritime Corp., Kostas Me las, The [1980] Com. LR
. .. 1·316, 1·323

Lloyd's Rep. 238; 70 R.P.C. 238; [[1954] C.L.J. 32; Sec., December 1953, 3; [1981] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 18. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·091, 18·167
r· 529; 33 Can. Bar R.164; 17 M.L.R.154; 17 Conv.(N.s.) 433], C.A.; revers- S.M.K. Cabinets v. Hili Modem Electrics Pty. [1984] V.R. 391 (1984) 1 Const. LJ.
ing [1953] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 84. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·094, 1·099, 1·103, 1·112, 1·120 159 Supreme Ct. of Victoria.... . .. 10·037, 10-039, 10·044, 10·046A, 10·047
Rose & Frank Co. v. Crompton (J.R.) & Brothers Ltd. [1925] A.C. 445; [1924] All Sabemo Ltd. v. De Groot (1991) 8 B.CL. 132. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·006, 6·197, 6,203
E.R. Rep. 245; 94 L.J.K.B. 120; 132 L.T. 641; 30 Com. Cas. 163, H.L. . . . . 1·083 Sabemo Pty. Ltd v. North Sydney Municipal Council [1977] 2 N.S.W.L.R.
Rosebaugh Stanhope (Broadgate Phase 6) plc v. Redpath Dorman Long Ltd 880. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·267,1·270,3·076,8·104
(1990) 50 BLR 69. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,018, 6·064, 6·090, 6·i98, 6·204 Sacher v. African Canvas & Jute Industries 1952 (3) S.A.LR. 31. . 4·009, 5,002
Ross v. Caunters [1980] Ch. 297; [1979] 3 W.L.R. 605· [1979] 3 AUER 580· (1979) Saddler v. U.S. (1961) 227 F. (2d) 411.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7·083, 7·092, 7·093, 7·114
12~ S.J..605 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . ·. : .. .' . . . . l ·278 St.John Shipping Corporation v. Rank (Joseph) [1957] 1 Q.B. 267; [1956] 3 W.L.R.
Ross Eng1neenng Co. v. Pace (1946) 153 Fed. Rep. (2d) 35 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7·096 870; 100 S.J. 41; [1956} 3 All E.R. 683; [1956] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 413. . . . 4·274, 17·048
RossdaJ; v. Denny [1921] 1 Ch.57; 90L.J.Ch.204; 124L.T. 294;65 S.J. 59;37T.L.R. Saint Line Ltd. v. Richardsons Westgarth & Co. Ltd. [1940] 2 K.B. 99; 109 LJ.K.B.
· · · - · · · · · · - · - · · - - - - - - . - - - - . - - . - . - , - . . . . , . . . . . . . . 3-055 3-058 959; 163 L.T. 175; 56 T.L.R. 716; 84 S.J. 574; 45 Com. Cas. 208. . . . . . 8·096, 8·214
Rossmoor Sanitation Inc. v. Pylon Insurance 532 P. 2nd 97, [1975] . . . . . . . . 1·235 15·053 Salford Corporation v. Lever [1891] 1 Q.B. 168; 25 Q.B.D. 363; 60 L.J.Q.B. 39; 63
Rothfield v. Monolakos [1989] 2 S.C.R. 1259 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' 1·359 L.T. 658; 39W.R. 85; 55J.P. 244;7T.L.R.18 3·079
Routledge v. Grant (1828) 4Bing. 653; 1 Moo.& P. 717· 6L.J (o s) c p 16fr 3C &. Salsbury v. Woodland [1970] 1 Q.B. 324; [1969] 3 W.L.R. 29; [1969] 3 All E.R. 863;
P. 267; 29 R.R. 672 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .' ... .° . .°. ·.. : .° .. .'.. i.oz9 3·072 113 S.J. 327, CA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·320, 1·387
Roux v. Colonial Government (1901) 18 Cape of Good Hope (S.C.) Rep. 143 .... '5·040, Salter(Robert) ConstructionPty. Ltd. v. Elmbee Pty. Ltd., (Unrep.) Supreme Ct. of
5.044 Victoria, June 29, 1990, noted in [1990] A.C.L.D. 874. . . . . . . . . . . . 4·305, 12·096
Rover International v. Cannon Films [1989] 1 W.L.R. 912; [1988} BCLG710· [1989] Samson & Samson Ltd. v. Procter [1975] N.Z.L.R. 655 ... 8.129, 8·136, 8·137, 8·138., 8·140
3 All E.R. 423, C.A., reversing . ......................... ' . 4·229 4·230 Samuels v. Davis [1943] 1 K.B. 526; 112 L.J.K.B. 561; 168 L.T. 296; [1943] 2 All E.R.
Rowe v. Tum~r Hopkins & Partners [1980] 2 N.Z.L.R. 550. . . . . . . . . . . : . 1.373' 1·377 3............. 4·119
Rowerson Aucraft Corporation v. Fairchild Industries 632 F. Supp. 1494 ' San Sebastian Pty. Ltd. v. Minister Administering the Environment Planning and
(1986). - · · - - - - - .. - - - ... - .... - - - . - - - - ...... - . . . . . 12-014 12-015 Assessment Act 1979 (1987) 68 A.L.R. 161; (1987) 3 Const. L.J. 212; (1986)
Rowlands (Mark) v. Berni Inns [1985] Q.B. 211; [1985] 3 W.L.R. 964; (1985) i29S.J. ' 61 ALJ.R 41, High Ct. of Australia; (1986) 162 C.L.R 340. . . . . . . . 1·282, 1·288
811; [1986] 3 All E.R. 473; [1985] 2 E.G.L.R. 92; (1985) 276 E.G. 191; [1985] 2 Sanders (Arthur) Re. (1981) 17 Build. L.R. 125. . . . . 8·080, 8·084, 13·130, 16·017, 16·018,
Lloyd'.s Rep. 437; (1985) 135 New L.J. 962; (1986) 83 L.S. Gaz. 35, C.A.; 16·055, 16·058
. affirmmg (1984) 134 New L.J. 236. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·139, 15·021 Sanders Construction v. Eric Newham [1969] Qd R 29. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·054, 8·055
Rowhng v. TakaroProperties. [1988] A.C. 473; [1988] 2 W.L.R.418; (1988) 132S.J. Sandy v. Yukon Construction Co. (1961) 26 D.L.R. 254. . . . . . . . . .. 6·192, 14-067
126~ [1988] 1 AllE.R 163; (1988) 85 LS. Gaz 35 P.C . . . . . . . . 1·301, 1·385 2·129 Sanson Floor Company v. Forst'sLtd. [1942] 1 W.W.R. 553; [1942] 1 D.L.R. 451;57
Royal Design Studio Ltd. v. Chang Development Ltd. [1991] 2 M.L.J. 229 . . . . . i7·074 B.C.R. 222, Canada. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·205, 4-101
Royscott Trust v. Rogerson [1991 J2 Q.B. 297; [1991] 3 W.L.R 57; [1991 J3 All E.R. Sassoon (M.A.) & Sons Ltd. v. International Banking Corporation [1927] A.C. 711;
294; (1991) _135 S.J. 444; [1992] R.T.R. 9~; (1992) ~1 Tr. L.R. 23; {1991] 96 L.J.P.C. 153; 137 L.T. 501, P.C. . . . . . . . . . 1·223
C.C.L.R.15, (1991) 141 NewLJ.493; The Times,Apri13, 1991; The Indepen- Sattin v. Poole (1901) Hudson Building Contracts (4th ed.), Vol. 2, p. 306. . . . . . . 10·029,
dent, Apnl 1~, 1?91; Daily Telegraph, April 25, 1991, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . 2·205 10-034, 10·083, 12·081

Ii
Royston Urban D1stnct Council v. Royston Builders Ltd. (1961) 177 E.G. Satyabrata Ghoes v. Mujneeran Bangor & Co. [1954] A.S.C. 44, S.C.R. 310 India 4·239
589. · · · · · · .... 1·112, 1·115, 1·121, 1·214, 1,247, 2·060, J.048, 3,052, 5·010, 6·187, Saunders v. Anglia Building Society. See Saunders (Executrix of the Estate of Rose
. 6-188, 7·057, 7·123 Maud Gallie) v. Anglia Building Society
Rozelle Childcare Centre v. Update Constructions (1988) 17 A.C.L.R. 31. . . . . . . 1 ·223 --v. Brading Harbour Improvement Co. (1885) [1885] W.N. 36; 52 l,.T. 426 . . 4-299
1·264, 1·270, 1·27i. --v. Broadstairs Local Board (1890) (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 164. . . 2·187, 2·215
Roz1;1y v. Marnul, 250 N.E. (2d) 656 (1969). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l•281 1·283 - v . Edwards [1987] 1 W.L.R 1116; (1987) 131 SJ. 1039; [1987] 2 All E.R. 651;
Rubm v. Coles 253 N.Y.S. 808-811 (1931). . . . ,(100' 4·101 (1987) 84 L.S. Gaz. 2193; (1987) 137 New L.J. 389; (1987) 84 L.S. Gaz. 2535,
Ruffv. Rinaldo (1873) 55 N.Y. 664 ·::::... io,055 C.A.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·276, 4·278, 4-282
cii TABLE OF CASES TABLE OF CASES ciii

Saunders (Executrix of the Estate of Rose Maud Gallie) v. Anglia Building Society Secretary of State for Transport v. Birse-Farr Joint Venture (1992), (1993) 62 BLR
[1971] A.C. 1004; [1970} 3 W.L.R. 1078; sub nom. Saunders v. Anglia Build- 36............ 8·099
ing Society, 114 S.J. 885;sub nom. Saunders (Executrix of the Estate of Rose Seddon v. North Eastern Salt Co. Ltd. [1905] 1 Ch. 326; [1904-7] All E.R. 817; 74
Maud Gallie) v. Anglia Building Society (formerly Northampton Town and L.J.Ch. 199; 91 L.T. 793; 53 W.R. 232; 21 T.L.R. 118; 49 S.J. 119. 1·148
County Building Society) [1970] 3 All E.R. 961; [88 L.Q.R. 190], Sedleigh-Denfield v. O'Callaghan [1940] A.C. 880; 3 All E.R. 349; 164 L.T. 72; 50
H.L............... . .......... 1·100, 1·106 T.L.R. 887; 84S.J. 651;sub nom. Sedleigh Denfield v. St. Joseph's Society for
Sauter Automation v. Goodman(H.C.) (Mechanical Services) Ltd. (1986)34Build. Foreign Missions, 109 L.J.K.B. 893. . ..... 1-339, 4·266
L.R. 81. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·035, 13·103 Seely v. White Motor Co. 403 P. (2d) 245 (1965), California Sup. Ct. . . . . . . . . . l ·309
Savage v. Board of School Trustees (1951) 3 D.L.R. 39 2·158 Sellar v. Highland Railway [1919) S.C. (H.L.) 19..................... 6·102, 6-103
Savage Brothers Ltd. v. Shillington Heating Ltd. (1985) 5 Const. L.J. 295. . 6-075, 6°088, Selway v. Fogg (1839) 5 M. & W. 83; 8 L.J.Ex 199; 52 R.R. 650 . . . . . . . . . 3·077
6·160, 10·070, 10·076, 10·077, 10·095 Senanayake v. Cheng [1966] A.C. 63; [1965] 3 W.L.R. 715; [1965] 3 All E.R. 296; 109
Savannah etc. Railway v. Callahan (1876) 56 Ga. (lOJackson) 331 U.S. Dig. (1877) S.J. 756, P.C.... . . . . . . . . . . .......... 1·147, 1·153
p. 156 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.009 Sethia (1944) Ltd. v. Partabmull Rameshwar [1951} 2 All E.R. 352n.; [1951] 2
Savory v. Holland & Hannen & Cubitts (Southern) [1964] 1 W.L.R. 1158; [1964] 3 Lloyd's Rep. 89. . . . . . . ............ 3·060, 4-252
All E.R.18; 108 S.J. 479, C.A ............................. 1·329, 1·334 Shaddock & Associates Pty. v. Parramatta City Council (No. 1) (1980-81) 150
Scammell v. Ouston [1941] A.C.251; [1941] 1 AllE.R.14; llOL.J.K.B.197; 164L.T. C.L.R. 225, High Ct. of Australia . . . . . . . . 1-282
379; 57 T.L.R. 280; 85 S.J. 224; 46 Com. Cas. 190. . 1·043, 1·044, 1·046 --v. Parramatta City Council (1981) 36 A.L.R. 385, High Ct. of Australia. . 1·134
Scarborough Rural District Council v. Moore (1968) 112 L.J. 986; 118 New L.J.1150 Shaffer (James) v. Findlay Durham & Brodie (sued as a finn) [1953] 1 W.L.R.106;
The Times, November 26, 1968, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·104 97 S.J. 26; C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·216
Scarf v. Jardine (1882) 7 App. Cas. 345; 51 L.J.Q.B. 612; 47 L.T. 258; 30 W.R. 893 14·023 Shamrock S.S. Co. v. Storey & Co. (1899) 81 L.T. 413; 16 T.L.R. 6; 8 Asp. M.L.C.
Schiffahrtsagentur Hamburg Middle East Line G.m.b.H. Hamburg v. Virtue Ship- 590; 5 Com. Cas. 21. ............ 1·044, 1·047
ping Corporation Monrovia, (No. 2) Oinioussian Virtue, The. [1981] 2 Shanklin Pier Co. v. DetelProducts {1951] 2K.B. 854; [1951] 2AllE.R. 471; 95 S.J.
Lloyd's Rep. 300 Com. L.R. 165.................... 18·004, 18·173, 18·194 563; [1951] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 187; [212 L.T. 149]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·291, 13,020
Schiltz v. Cullen-Schiltz 228 N.W. (2d) 10 (1975) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·295 Sharpe v. San Paulo Ry. (1873) L.R. 8 Ch. App. 597, 605n., 27 L.T. 699; 29
Schindler Lifts (Hong Kong) v. Shui On Construction Co. {1984) 29 Build. L.R. 95 L.T. 9........................... 4-041, 6-039, 6·042, 6·127, 7·024, 12·072
C.A. of Hong Kong. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13·116 Sharpley v. Louth and E.C. Ry. (1876) 2 Ch.D. 663; 46 L.J.Ch. 259; 35 L.T. 71 . . . 3·077
Schofield (A.) (Builders) v. Scarborough Corporation (1958) 172 E.G. 809, Shaw (Tom) & Co. v. Moss Empires (1908) 25 T.L.R. 190 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-058
C.A. . . . . . . . . . . .... 1·203 Shayler v. Woolf[1946] Ch. 320; [1947] L.J.R. 71; 175 L.T. 170; 90 S.J. 357; [1946] 2
Schonekess v. Bach (1968) 66 D.L.R. (2d) 415; (1968) 62 W.W.R. 673, Canada, Sup. AIIE.R. 54; [1946] W.N.106. . . . . . . . .... 14·038, 18·125
Ct. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·148 Sheffield Corporation v. Barclay [1905] A.C 392. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·171, 15·039, 15·061
Schuler (L.) A.G. v. Wickman Machine Tool Sales [1974] A.C. 235; [1973] 2 W.L.R. Sheldon v. McBeath, Australian Tort Rep. {1993] 81-209 (1994) 11 I.C.L.R. 76 .... 2-083,
683; 117 S.J. 340; [1973] 2 All E.R. 39; [1973] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 53, H.L.; affirm- 2·193
ing sub nom. Wickman Machine Tool Sales v. Schuler (L.) A.G. [1972] 1 Shell U.K. Ltd. v. Lostock Garage Ltd. {1976] 1 W.L.R.1187; [1977] 1 All E.R. 481;
W.L.R. 840; 116 S.J. 352; [1972] 2 All E.R. 1173, C.A.. . . . . . . 1·014, 1·222, 4-212, 120 S.J. 523, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . 1·181
18·084 Sherren v. Harrison (1860) (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 5 . . . . . . . . . . 8-017
Schwebel v. Telekes (1967) 61 D.L.R. (2d) 470, C.A., Ontario. . . . . . . 1·372, 4·288 Sherry, Re,Londonand County Bank v. Terry (1884) 25 Ch.D. 692; 53 L.J.Ch. 404;
Scotson v. Pegg(1861) 6H.&N.295;30L.J.Ex.225;3 L.T. 753;9W.R.280; 158E.R. 49L.T.36;50L.T.227;32W.R.270,394 . . . . . . 17-019
121. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·065, 1·066 Shiloh Spinners Ltd. v. Harding [1973] A.C. 691; {1973] 2 W.L.R.28; (1972) 117 S.J.
Scott v. Avery (1856) 5 H.L.C. 811; 25 L.J.Ex. 308; 2 Jur. 815. . ......... 6·040, 6·063, 34; [1973] 1 All E.R. 90; 25 P. & C.R. 48, H.L.; reversing [1972] 1 Ch. 326;
6·093, 6·095, 8·092, 18-003, 18-036, 18-039, 18·040, 18-041, 18-048, [1971] 3 W.L.R. 34; 115 S.J. 248; [1971] 21 All E.R. 307; 22 P. & C.R.
18·052, 18·065, 18·102, 18·108, 18·109, 18·110, 18·111 447. . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·022, 12·022, 12·023, 12·028, 12-029
- - v. Carluke Local Authority (1879) 6 R. (Ct. of Sess. Cas.) 616. . . . . . . 6·013, 6·136, Shipley Urban District Council v. Bradford Corporation [1936] Ch. 375; 105 L.J.Ch.
6·137, 18·129 225; on appeal [1936] Ch. 399; 154 L.T. 444, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-110
--v. Corporation of Liverpool (1858) 28 L.J.Ch. 230. . . . . . 6-078, 6,126, 6·146, 18·065 Shipway v. Broadwood [1899] 1 Q.B. 369; 68 L.J.Q.B. 360; 80 L.T. 11; 15 T.L.R.
- v. Coulson [1903] 2 Ch. 249; 72 L.J.Ch. 600; 88 L.T. 653; 19 T.L.R. 440, C.A. 1·096 145 . . . . . 2·233
- v. Pattison [1923] 2 K.B. 723; 92 L.J.K.B. 886; 129 L.T. 830; 39 T.L.R. 557 . 8·104 Shipway (James) & Co. v. Wyndham & Albery, (1908) The Times, December 1,
Scott Lithgow v. Secretary of State for Defence (1989) 45 BLR 1, H.L...... 1-220, 4-269, 1908, Digest, Vol. VII p. 386. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·025
5.037, 7·007, 9·026, 10·040, 10·063, 13·008, 13·010, 13·026, 15·060 Shire of Sutherland v. Heyman (1985) 157 C.L.R. 424............. 1-353, 1·359, 2·084
Scottish Special Housing Association v. Wimpey Construction U.K. [1986] 1 Shirlaw v. Southern Foundries (1926) Ltd. [1939] 2 K.B. 206; affinned [1940] A.C.
W.L.R. 995; (1986) 130S.J. 592; [1986] ZAllE.R. 957; (1986) 34 Build. LR. I; 701, H.L. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·180
(1986) 2 Const. L.J. 149; (1987) 9 Con. L.R.; (1986) 136 New L.J. 753; (1986) Shore & Horwitz Construction Co. v. Franld of Canada (1964) S.C.R.
83 L.S. Gaz. 2652, H.L.; reversing (1985) 31 Build. L.R 17, Ct. of Session . 15.020 589.. . ................ 8·187,8·189,8·192,8·194
Scri~ener v. Pask (1866) L.R. 1 C.P. 715 ...................... 2·059, 2·063, 8-018 Shore v. Wilson (1842) 9 Cl. and Fin. 355; 11 Sim 615n; 4 Stat.Tr.N.S. App. 1370; 5
Seal Tite Cap v. Ehret 589 S. Supp. 701 (1984) New Jersey D.C. . . . . . . . . . . . . 13·112 Scott, N.R. 958; 7 Jur. 787n; 8 E.R. 450, H.L.; subsequent proceedings sub
Sealand of the Paci.fie v. McHaffie (Robert C.) (1974) 2 Build. L.R. 74; British nom. Att.-Gen. v. Shore (1843), 11 Sim. 592; 1 L.T.O.S.166;7 J.P. 392; 7 Jur.
Columbia, C.A.................................. 1·291, Z.117, 13·020 781; 59 E.R. 1002; sub rwm. Att.-Gen. v. Wilson (1848), 16 Sim. 210 . 1·212
--v. Ocean Cement Ltd. [1973) 33 D.L.R. (3d) 625 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·154 Sika Contracts Ltd. v. Gill B.L. and Closeglen Properties (1978) 9 BLR 11. .. 2·067, 2·080
Seaman's Direct Buying Service v. Standard Oil of California 686 P. (3d) 1158 Simaan General Contracting Co. v. Pilkington Glass [1988] Q.B. 758; [1987]
(1984) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·197 1 W.L.R. 516; [1987] 1 All E.R. 345; (1987) 131 S.J. 297; (1987) Const. L.J.
Seath v. Moore (1886) 11 App. Cas. 350; 55 L.J.P.C. 54; 54 L.T. 690; 5 Asp. M.C. 300; (1987) 84 L.S.Gaz. 819; (1986) 136 New L.J. 824, Official Referee . . . 1·280
586. . . 11·009, 11·011, 11·012, 11·030, 11·040 -v.PilkingtonGlass (No.2) [1988] Q.B. 758; [1988]2W.L.R. 761; (1988) 132S.J.
Secretary of State for the Environment v. Essex Goodman & Suggitt [1986] 1 463; [1988] 1 All E.R. 791; [1988] F.T.L.R. 469; (1988) 40 Build. L.R. 28;
W.L.R.1432; [1985] 2E.G.L.R.168; [1986) 130S.J.574; (1985)275 E.G.308; (1988) 138 New L.J. 53; (1988) L.S.Gaz. March 16, 44, C.A.. . . . . . . 1·292, 1·352,
(1985) 32 Build. L.R.140; (1985) 1 Const. L.J. 302; (1986) 83 L.S. Gaz. 2155, 4· 121, 13·045
Official Referee l ·307 Simon Builders Ltd. v. H.D. Fowles Ltd. (1992) 11 A.C.L.R. 23 . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·203
civ TABLE OF CASES TABLE OF CASES CV

Simplex Concrete Piles v. Mayor, Aldermen and Councillors of the Metropolitan Smith (Brian) (1928) Ltd. v. WheatsheafMills [1939] 2 K.B. 302 . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-253
Borough of St. Pancras (1958) 4 Build. L.R. 80, D.C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7·029 Smith, Coney & Barratt v. Becker, Gray & Co. [1916] 2 Ch. 86; 84 L.J.Ch. 865; 112
Simplex Floor Finishing Appliance Co. Ltd. v. Duranceau [1941] 4 D.L.R. 260 7·047, L.T 914· 31 T.L.R.151 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·109
7.045 Smith & Montiomery v. Johnson Bros. (1954) 1 D.L.R. (2d) 392. . . . . 3·049,
Simpson v. Kerr (1873) 33 U.C.Q.B. 345 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10·072 4-157, 4°247, 4·255, 13·102, 13-134
- - v. Metcalfe (1854) 24 L.T.(o.s.) 139; 3 W.R. 88 . . . . . . . . . . . 1·118 Smyth v. R. (1884) 1 N.Z.L.R. 80, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7·055, 7·060
--v. Trim Town Commissioners (1898) 321.L.T. 129. . . . . 8·114, 9·016, 10·050 10·052 Sneezum Re ex parte Davis (1876) 3 Ch.D. 463; 45 L.J.Bk. 137; 35 L.T. 329; 25 W.R.
Simpsons Ltd. v. Pigott Constructions (1974) 40 D.L.R. (3d) 47 . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' 5·056, 49'. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ·............ 2-056, 16·028
5·057, 6-046, 6-056, 6·067 Societe Commerciale de Reassurance v. Eras International (formerly Eras (U.K.))
Sims v. Foster Wheeler [1966] 1 W.L.R. 769; 110 S.J. 189; (1966] 2 All E.R. (Note); Eras Eil Actions, The [1992] 2 All E.R. 82; [1992] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 570,
313. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,049, 15·050, 15·054 C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·366, 1·369, 1·376
- - v. London Necropolis Co. (1885) 1 T.L.R. 584 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11·004 Societe Franco*Tuisienne D'Armement*Tunis v. Government of Ceylon [1959]
Sims& Co. v.MidlandRy. (1913] 1 K.B.103;82L.J.K.B. 67; 107 L.T.100;29T.L.R. W.L.R. 787 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·074
81; 18 Com. Cas. 44 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9·029 Solle v. Butcher [1950] 1 K.B. 671; 66 T.L.R. (Pt.1) 448; [1949] 2 All E.R. 1107; 66
Sinclair v. Bowles (1829) 9 B. & C. 92; 4 M. & Ry. 1; 7 L.J.(o.s.) K.B. 178; 32 R.R. T.L.R. (Pt. l) 448 ............... 1·094, 1·096, 1·102, 1·105, 1·145, 1·148, 3·077
589 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-010 Sonat Offshore S.A. v. Amerada Hess Developments and Texaco (Britain) [1987] 2
- v. Logan (1961) 1961 S.L.T. (Sh.Ct.) 10; 76 Sh.Ct. Rep. 161. ......... 2·250, 3·076 F.T.L.R. 220; [1988] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 145; (1988) 39 BLR 1 C.A. . . . . . . . . 15·040,
S~nclair Sc?t! & Co. Ltd. v. Naughten (1929) 43 C.LR. 310, Australia...... 1-058, 3·056 15-041, 15·046
Smdall (W1lliam) v. North West Thames Regional Health Authority [1977] !.C.R. Sorrell v. Smith [1925] A.C. 700; 94 L.J.Ch. 347; 133 L.T. 370; 69 S.J. 641;41 T.L.R.
. 294; (1977) 121 SJ. 170; (1977) 4 Build. L.R. 151, H.L.. . . . . . . . . . . 1·220, 8·054 529 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3·080
S1porex Trade S.A. v. Banque lndosvez [1986] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 146 . . . . . . . . 17·065 South Africa Mullin (Pty.) Ltd. v. Benade Ltd. [1952] 1 S.A.L.R. 211 . . . . . . . . . 1·180
Sist Constructions v. State Electricity Commission of Victoria [1982] V.R. 547, South Australian Railways Commissioner v. Egan (1973) 130 C.L.R. 506 (1973) 47
Supreme Ct. of Victoria ...... 2-163, 2·169, 2-175, 2-226, 7-103, 8·006, 8·010, 8-011, A.L.J.R. 140. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·086, 6-093, 6-095, 18·039, 18·041
8·041 South Australian Superannuation Fund Investment Trust v. Leighton Contractors
Skips A/S Nordheim v. Syrian Petroleum Co.; Varenna, The [1984] Q.B. 599; (1984] (1990) 55 S.A.S.R. 327 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·171, 8·211, 18·159, 18·159A, 18·159C
2 W.L.R. 156; (1983) 127 S.J. 840; [1983] 3 All E.R. 645; [1983] 2 Lloyd's Rep. South Devon Ry. exparte., Re Elliott (1848) 12 Jur.(o.s.) 445. . . . . . 1·255, 6·101, 6·140,
' 18·128
592; [1984] L.M.C.L.Q. 194, C.A.; [1983] 2 All E.R. 357; [1983] 1 Lloyd's
Rep. 416; [1983] Com. L.R. 30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3·050, 18·032 South East Thames Regional Health Authority v. Lovell (Y.J.) London (1985) 32
Slater v. Hoyle & Smith [1920] 2 K.B. 11 8·226 BLR 127; (1987) 9 Const. L.R 36 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-026
Slower v. Loddey (1900) 20 N.Z.L.R. 321. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-161, 4·045, 4-049, 4-193 South Pacific Manufacturing Ltd. v. N.Z. Security Consultants Ltd. [1992] 2
Smeaton Hanscomb & Co. v. Setty (Sassoon I.) Son & Co. (No. 2) (1953] 1 W.L.R. N.Z.L.R. 282. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·289, 1·302
1481; 97 S.J. 876; [1953] 3 AIIE.R.1588; [1953] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 580...... 18·178 South Wale&-Railway v. Wythes (1854) 5 De G.M. & G. 880; 24 L.J.Ch. 87; 3 Eq.
Smith v. Bush (Eric S.); Harris v. Wyre Forest District Council [1990} l A.C. 831; Rep. 153; 24 L.T.(o.s.) 165; 3 W.R. 133; 104 R.R. 327 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-298
[1989] 2 W.L.R. 790; [1989] 2 All E.R. 514; (1989) 133 S.J. 597; (1990) 9 Southern Water Authority v. Carey [1985] 2 A.E.R 1077.... 1·326, 6·003, 13·043, 13·054,
15-014
Tr.L.R.1; 87 L.G.R. 685; (1989) 21 H.L.R.424; (1989] 17 E.G. 68 and [1989}
18 E.G. 99; (1989) 139 New L.J. 576; (1989) 153 L.G. Rev. 984, H.L. . . . . 1·178, Southway Group v. Wolff (1991) 57 BLR 33 ...... 14-009, 14·010, 14·011, 14·019, 16-004
1·287 2·203 Sparham-Souter v. Town and Country Developments (Essex) Ltd. [1976] Q.B. 858;
- v . Chadwick (1884) 9 App. Cas. 187;53 L.J.Ch. 873;50 L.T. 697;48J.P. 644;32 ' [1976] 2 W.L.R. 493; [1976] 2 All E.R. 65; 120 S.J. 216; 74 L.G.R. 355, C.A.;
W.R.687,H.L. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . 1·146,1·152 [[1976] L.G.C. 247]; (1976) 241 E.G. 309; (1976) 3 Build. L.R. 70....... 1·277,
- - v. Gordon (1880) 30 U.C.C.P. 552. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·114, 6·117, 12-035 1·347, 1·348, 1·361,2·084
- v . Hamilton [1951] Ch.174; 66T.L.R. (Pt. 2) 937; 94S.J. 724; [1950] 2 AIIE.R. Spartan Steel & Alloys Ltd. v. Martin& Co. (Contractors) (1973] Q.B. 27; [1972] 3
928 . . ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9·022 W.LR. 502; [19072] 3 All E.R. 557; 116 S.J. 648; 14 K.I.R. 75, C.A. . . . . . . 1·323
--v. Howden Union (1890) 1 Cab. & Ell. 125. . . . . . . 6·097, 6·115, 6·118, 6·120, 6·128, Spectra v. P/Dindarz [1976] 2 N.S.W.L.R. 617 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . 12·044
6·141, 6·146, 12-079, 12·082 Spence v. Crawford [1939] 3 All E.R. 271, H.L............... . . . . . . 1·148
-v.Hughes (1871) L.R. 6 Q.B. 597;440 L.J.Q.B. 221; 25 L.T. 329; 19 W.R.1059; Spencer v. Harding (1870) L.R. 5 C.P. 561; 39 L.J.C.P. 332 19 W.R. 48; 27 L.T.
[1861-73] All E.R. Rep. 632. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·097, 1·101, 1-108 237 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·022, 3·053
--v.Johnson (1899) 15T.L.R.179 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S.165 Sperry v. Government of Israel 689 F. (2d) 30 (1982) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-069
--v. Land &House Property Corporation (1884) 29 Ch.D. 7; 51 L.T. 718; 49 J.P. Stadhard ( or Stannard) v. Lee (1863) 3 B. & S. 364; 1 N.R. 433; 32 LJ.QB. 75; 7 L.T.
182, C.A. . . . . . . . . ... ..... ... . .... 1·145 850· 9 Jur.(N.s.) 908· 11 W.R. 361; 129 R.R. 357. . .... 6·023, 6.025, 6·027, 12·045,
' ' 12-065
- - v. Littlewoods Organisation Ltd.; Maloco v. Same sub nom. Smith v. Little-
woods Organisation (Chief Constable, Fife Constabulary, third party) Stag Line Ltd. v. Tyle Shiprepair Group [1984] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 211; (1985) 4 Tr.
(1987] A.C. 241; (1987] 2 W.L.R. 480; [1987] 1 All E.R. 710; (1987) 131 S.J. L. 33 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·240, 4· 104
226; (1987) 84 L.S.Gaz. 905; (1987) 137 New L.J. 149, H.L.. . 1·321 1·337 Stale v. Winters (1953) 921 L.T.R. 66 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·133
- - v. Martin (1925] 1 K.B. 745. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·006, 18·007, 18-044, 1.8-141 Star International v. Bergbau-Handel [1966] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 16 . . . 18·061
- v . Mayberry (1878) 13 Nev. 427; U.S. Dig. (1879) p. 142 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-007 Startup v. McDonald (1843) 6 M & G 593 . . . . 9·006
- - v. O_ld W<:rson Development Company 479 S.W. (2d) 795 (1972), Sup. a. of Stead Hazel & Co. v. Cooper [1933) 1 K.B. 840. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16·012
Missoun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-106 Steeds v. Steeds (1889) 22 Q.B.D. 537; 58 L.J.Q.B. 302; 60 L.T. 318; 37 W.R. 378;
--v. Sadler (1880) 6 Viet. L.R 5 ............................... . 6·026 [1886-90] All E.R.1021 .. , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·090
- - v. Salt Lake City 104 Fed. Rep. 457 (1900) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7·079 Steel Co. of Canada v. Willand Management [1966) S.C.R. 746...... 4·057, 4·088, 4·090,
--v. South Wales Switchgear Ltd. [1978] 1 W.L.R.165; (1977) 122S.J. 61;[1978] 1 4·091, 4-093, 4-111, 4-113
All E.R. 18; (1977) 8 Build. L.R. 5, H.L.. . . . . . . . . 15·040, 15·041, 15-042, 15,044 Steel Wing Co., Re [1921] 1 Ch. 349; 124 L.T. 664; 65 S.J. 240; [1920] B. & C.R. 160;
- - v. Vange Scaffolding and Engineering Co. [1970] 1 W.L.R. 733; 114 S.J. 118; sub nom. Steel Ring Co., re Lords Petition, 90 L.J.Ch. 116 . . . . . . . . . . . 14-017
[1970] 1 All E.R. 249; 8 K.I.R. 709. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15·052, 15·053 Steljes v. Ingram (1903) 19 T.L.R. 534. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... 1·372, 2·083
Smith (A.) & Son (BognorRegis) v. Walker [1952] 2Q.B. 319; [1952] 1 T.L.R.1089; Steller v. Parra Council (1986] 1 N.Z.L.R. 84 1·282
96 S.J. 260; [1952] 1 All E.R. 1008, C.A.. . . . . . . . . . . . 4·277, 4-280, 7·123 Steven v. Pryce-Jones (1913) 25 W.L.R. 172 (Canada) . . . . 8·166
cvi TABLE OF CASES TABLE OF CASES cvii
Stevens v. Anglian Water Authority [1987] 1 W.L.R.1381 1·344 Sutcliffe v. Chippendale Edmondson (A Firm) (1971) 18 Build. L.R. 149 2·095,
- v . Gourley (1859) 7 C.B.(N.s.) 99;29 L.J.C.P.1; 1 LT. 33; 6Jur.147; 8 W.R. 85; 2·190, 2·219, 2·230, 5·020, 5·051
141 E.R. 752. . . . . . 4-279 - v . Thackrah [1974] A.C. 727; [1974] 2 W.L.R. 295; 118SJ.148, [1974] 1 All E.R.
- - v. Mewes & Davis, June 8, C.A. 1901 (Unrep.) . . . . . . . . . . . 7·044 859; [1974] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 318, H.L.; reversing [1973] 1 W.L.R. 888; 117 S.J.
- v . Taylor (1860) 2 F. & F. 419. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·177, 12-052 509; [1973] 2 All E.R.1047; [1973] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 115, C.A........ 1·130, 1·302,
Stevenson v. Mclean (1880) 5 Q.B.D. 346; 49 L.J.Q.B. 701; 42 L.T. 897; 28 2·190, 2·214, 2·215, 2·219, 2-220, 2·221, 2·232, 6·184,
W.R. 916 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·028 6-228, 18·062, 18·063, 18·067, 18·071
- v . Watson (1879) 4 C.P.D. 148; 48L.J.C.P. 318; 40 L.T. 485; 43 J.P. 399; 27 W.R. Sutherland Shire Council v. Heyman (1985) 60 A.LR. 1~ [1985] 59 A.L.J.R. 564;
682. . . . . 2·073, 6·039, 6·110, 6·177, 6-179, 18·127 (1986) 2 Const. L.J. 150; [3 I.C.L.R 157];, High Ct. of Australia; reversing
Stewardson Stubbs & Collett Ltd. Re.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12·033, 12-039, 12·040, 12·041 (1982) 1 Const. L.J. 161, Sup. Ct. of New South Wales, Australia..... 1·296, 1·385
Stewardson Stubbs & Collett Ltd. and Bankstown Municipal Sutro (L.) & Co. v. Heilbut Symons & Co. [1917] 2 K.B. 348; 86 L.J.K.B. 1226; 116
Council Re. (An Arbitration between) (1965] N.S.W.R. 1671 . . . . . . . . . 12·010 L.T. 545; 33 T.L.R. 359; 14 Asp. M.L.C. 34; 23 Com. Cas. 21, C.A.. . . 1·225, 1·227
Stewart v. Brechin [1959] S.C. 306. . . . . . . . . . . . 2·206 Sutton v. Grey[1894] 1 Q.B.285;63LJ.Q.B. 633; 69L.T.673;42 W.R.195; 9R.106;
- v . Reavell's Garage [1952] 2 Q.B. 545; [1952] 1 T.L.R.1266; 96 S.J. 314; [1952] 1 lOT.L.R.96. 17·017
AHE.R.1191............ . .. 4-086,4·120 Swanson Construction v. Govt. of Manitoba (1963) 40 D.L.R. (2d) 162..... 4·147, 4·148,
Stewart (Lorne) v. Sindall (William) and N. W. Thames Regional Health Authority 4·152, 4-158, 4·255, 13·134
(1987) 35 Build. L.R. 109; (1988) 11 Con L.R. 99 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13·048 Swartz & Son (Pty.) Ltd. v. Wolmaransstad Town Council 1960 (2) S.A.L.R
Stewards v. Admiralty (1901) 18 T.L.R. 131, H.L.; reversing 17 T.L.R. 111 . . . . . 3-073 1. . . . . 3·065,
Stickney v. Keeble [1915] A.C. 386; [1914-15] AllE.R. Rep. 73; 84 L.J.Ch. 259; 112 4·210, 17·018
L.T. 644. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9·002, 9·003, 9·022 Sweet & Maxwell Ltd. v. Universal News Services Ltd. [1964) 2 Q.B. 699; [1964] 3
Stieller v. Porirua City Council [1986] 1 N.Z.L.R. 84; (1987) 3 Const. L.J. 312, W.L.R. 356; 108 S.J. 478; [1964] 3 All E.R. 30. . . . . . . . . 1·048, 3·058, 4·216, 4·217,
N.Z.C.A. . . 1·351 12·078
Stiff v. Eastbourne Local Board (1868) 19 L.T. 408; 20 L.T. 339; 17 W.R. 68, Swiney v. Ballymena Commissioners (1888) 23 L.Rlr. 122, 129 . . . . . . . . . 6-147
428... . . . . . . . . . . . . 17·010, 17-0llE, 17-026 Syarikat Perumahan Sdn. v. Bank Bumiputra [1991] 2 M.LJ. 565. . . . . . . 17·060, 17-063
Stilk v. Myrick (1809) 2 Camp. 317; 6Esp.129; 170 E.R.1168, N.P.... 1·068, 7·011, 7·024 Sykes (F. & G.) (Wessex) Ltd. v. Fine Fare Ltd. [1967] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 53, C.A.;
Stimson v. Gray [1929] 1 Ch. 629; 98 L.J.Ch. 315; 141 L.T. 456 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·303 reversing in part [1966] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 205 1·049
Stockloser v. Johnson [1954] 1 Q.B. 476; [1954] 2 W.L.R. 439; 98 S.J.178; [1954] 1 All Syrett (Pamela) v. Carr & Neave (A Firm) (1991) 54 BLR 121; (1990) 48 E.G. 118;
E.R. 630; C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12·021, 12·022 (1990) 6 Const. L.J. 305. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... 2·209, 2·210
Stoddart v. Union Trust Ltd. [1912] 1 K.B. 181; 81 L.J.K.B. 140; 105 L.T. 806 14-052 Syros Shipping Co. S.A. v. Elaghill Trading Co.; Proodos C, The [1980] 2 Lloyd's
Stovin-Braford v. VolpointProperties [1971] Ch.1007; [1971}3 W.L.R.256; 115 S.J. Rep. 390; [1981] 3 All E.R. 189; [1981] Com. L.R. 80 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·079
568, [1971] 3 AllE.R. 570, C.A.; affirming(1970) 114S.J. 823; The Times,July Sztejn v. J. Henry Schroder Banking Corporation 31 N.Y.S. (2d) 631 (1941), New
29, 1970 . .... ............................. 2·278 York Court of Appeals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17·069
Strata Construction Corporation v. Winkler (1987) 45 D.L.R (4th) 741 B.C.,
C.A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·119, 8·139, 8·141, 8·142
Stratford (Borough of) v. J.H. Ashman [1960] N.Z.L.R. 503 . . . . . . . . 5·045, 6°053, 6-082, Tai Hing Cotton Mill v. Liu Chong Hing Bank [1986] A.C. 80; [1985] 3 W.L.R. 317;
6·083 [1985] 2 All E.R. 947; (1985) 129 S.J. 503; [1986] F.LR. 14; [1985] 2 Lloyd's
Strongman (1945) v. Sincock [1955] 2 Q.B. 525; [1955] 3 W.L.R. 360; 99 S.J. 540; Rep. 313; (1985) 135 New L.J. 680; (1985) 82 L.S. Gaz 2995; [2Prof. Neg.17],
[1955] 3 All E.R. 90. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·205, 1·214, 4·278, 4·280 P.C.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 1.280, 1.375, 1.378
Stuart v. Smith (1816) 2 Marsh 435; 7 Taunt. 158; Holt N.P. 321 . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·279 Tailby v. Official Receiver (1888) 13 App. Cas. 523; 58 LJ.Q.B. 75; 60 L.T. 162; 37
Stubbs v. Holywell Ry. (1867) L.R. 2 Ex. 311; 36 L.J.Ex. 166; 16 L.T. 631; 15 W.R. W.R. 513; 4 T.L.R. 726 . . . . . . . . . . 14.041
869. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·054, 2·261, 4·006, 4·026, 4·270, 14-071 Tahrland v. Rodier (1866) 16 L.C. Rep. 473 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.234
Sturgeons Ltd. v. Municipality of Metropolitan Toronto (1968) 70 D.L.R. (2d) 20 Tamarac Development v. Delamater Freud & Associates 675 P. (2d) 361 (1984) . 2.092
[1968] 2 O.R. 526 (Canada) 1·057 Tamplin v. James (1880) 15 Ch.D.221; 43 L.T. 520; 29 W.R. 311, C.A. . ,...... . 1.097
Sudbrook Trading Estate Ltd. v. Eggleton [1983] 1 A.C. 444; [1982] 3 W.L.R. 315; Tamplin S.S. v. Anglo-Mexican Petroleum Products Co. [1916] 2 A.C. 397; 85
[1982] 3 AIIE.R. 1; 126 S.J. 512; (1982) 44 P. & C.R.153; (1982) 79 L.S.Gaz. L.J.K.B. 1389; 32 T.L.R. 677; 21 Com. Cas. 299 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.234
1175; (1983) 265 E.G. 215, H.L.; reversing [1981] 3 W.L.R. 361; [1981] 3 All Tancred v. Delagoa Bay &East Africa Ry. (1889) 23 Q.B.D. 239; 58 L.J.Q.B.459; 61
E.R. 105; (1981) 125 S.J. 513; (1981) 260 E.G. 1033, C.A. . . . . . . . 1·052 L.T. 229; 38 W.R. 15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.013, 14.014
Suisse Atlantique Societe D'Armement Maritime S.A. v. N.V. Rotterdamsche
TancredArrol & Co. v. Steel Company of Scotland (1890) 15 App. Cas. 125; 62L.T.
Kolen Centrale [1967] 1 A.C. 361; [1966] 2 W.L.R. 944; [1966] 2AllE.R. 61;
738. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.201, 4.202
110 S.J. 367; [1966] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 529; (29 M.L.R. 546), H.L.; affirming
[1965] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 533; [1965] C.L.Y. 3610, C.A.;. affinning [1965] 1 Tannenbaum Meadows v. Wright-Winston (1965) 49 D.L.R. (2d)
Lloyd's Rep. 166........... . . . . . . . . . . 1·231, 1·233 386. . . . . . 4.007, 4.017, 4.019, 4.227, 5.002, 5.006, 12.080
Sumpter v. Hedges [1898] 1 Q.B. 673; 67 LJ.Q.B. 545; 78 L.T. 378; 46 W.R. 454;42 Tapp v. Jones (1875) L.R. 10 Q.B. 591; 44 L.J.Q.B. 127; 33 L.T. 201; 23 W.R.
S.J. 362. . . 4-011, 4·017, 4·018, 4·019, 5·004, 11·007, 11·013 694 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.064
Sunbird Plaza v. Maloney (1988) 166 C.L.R. 245. 17·011F, 17·021 Tara Civil Engineering Ltd. v. MoorfieldDevelopmentsLtd. (1989) 46 B.L.R. 72; 16
Sunley v. Cunard White Star [1940] 1 K.B. 740; [1940] 2 All E.R. 97; 109; L.J.K.B. Con. L.R. 46; (1989) 5 Const. L.J. 308. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.305, 12.001, 12.094
833; 163 L.T. 257; 84 S.J. 392; 45 Com. Cas. 203 . . 8·194 Taunton-Collins v. Cromie [1964] 1 W.L.R. 633; 108 S.J. 277; [1964] 2 All
Sunley Homes Ltd. v. Borq [1970] 1 Q.B. 115; [1969] 3 W.L.R. 496; 113 S.J. 703; E.R. 332. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.015, 18.111, 18.112, 18.113, 18.196
[1969] 3 All E.R. 332, D.C. . . . . 2·148 Taverner & Co. v. Glamorgan County Council (1940) 164 L.T. 357; 39 L.G.R. 102;
Surf Realty Corp. v. Standing 78 S.E. (2d) 901 ...... 2·088 85 S.J. 142; 57 T.L.R 243 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.065
Surrey Heath Borough Council v. Lovell Construction and Haden Young (1988) 42 Taylor v. Brewer (1813) 1 M. & S. 290; 21 R.R. 831; 105 E.R. 108. . . . . . . . . 1.083, 2.248
Build. L.R. 30. .. 1·326 --v. Brown (1839) 2 Beav. 180; 9 L.J.Ch. 14; 50 R.R. 152 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.022
--v. Lovell Construction and Haden Young 48 BLR 108; 24 Con. L.R.1; (1990) 6 - v . Caldwell (1863) 3 B. & S. 826; 32 L.J.Q.B. 164; 8L.T. 356; 11 W.R. 726; 129
Const. L.J. 179, C.A.; affirming 15 Con. L.R. 68; 42 BLR 25; (1988) 4 Const. R.R. 573 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.096, 4.234, 4.245
L.J. 226. . . . . . . . . . . 5·028, 10-005, 13·043, 15·014 - v . Hall (1870) Ir.R. 4 C.L. 467; Ir. R. 5 C.L. 477 . . . . . . 2.031
cviii TABLE OF CASES TABLE OF CASES cix
Taylor v. Johnson [1983] 45 A.L.R. 265, High Ct. of Australia. . . . . . . . . . . 1.095, 1.096 Tito v. Waddell (No.2). Titov. Att.-Gen. {1977] Ch.106; [1977]2 W.L.R.496;{1977]
- v . Laird (1856) 1 H. & N. 266; 25 L.J.Ex. 329; 108 R.R. 562 .......... 4.006, 4.025 3 All E ..R. 129; Judgment on Damages [1977] 3 W.L.R. 972(N). . . . . . . . . 8·139,
Taylor (C.R.) (Wholesale) Ltd. v. Hepworths Ltd. [1977] 1 W.L.R. 659; (1976) 121 8·140, 8·142
S.J. 15; [1977] 2 All E.R. 784; (1976) 244 E.G. 631 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.141 Titterton v. Cooper (1882) 9 Q.B.D. 473; 51 L.J.Q.B. 472; 46 L.T. 870; 30 W.R.
Taylor (David) & Son v. Barnett Trading Co. [1953] 1 W.L.R. 562; 97 S.J. 226; [1953] 866 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16·011
1 All E.R. 843; [1953] l Lloyd's Rep. 181; C.A........... 18.008, 18.010, 18.134 Toepferv.Continental Grain Co. (1973) 117 S.J. 649; [1974] 1 Lloyd'sRep.11 C.A.;
Taylor-Woodrow International v. Minister of Health [1978] 19 S.AS.R. 1. .. 8.055, 8.181 a/finning [1973] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 289 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·031
Team Services Limited v. Kier Management and Design Limited (1993) 63 B.L.R. --v. WarincoA.G. {1978] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 569 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·256
76, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ;, . 1·223, 13·119 Token Construction Co. v. Charlton Estates (1973) 1 Build. L.R. 48, C.A. 6·088,
Tehno-lmpex v. Gebr van Weelde Scheepvaartkantoor B.V. [1981] Q.B. 648; 6·153, 6·158, 6·159, 10·075, 10,076
[1981] 2 W.L.R. 821; (1981) 125 S.J. 304; [1981] 2 All E.R. 669; [1981] 1 Tokyo Marine & Fire Insurance v. Costain (Australia) 1988 5 Aust. & N.Z.
Lloyd's Rep. 587; [1981] Com. L.R. 82, C.A.; reversing [1980] 1 Lloyd's Rep. Insurance Cases 75680 N.S.W. C.A. . . . . . . . . . 15·030
484. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.089, 18.010 Tolhurst v. Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers [1903] A.C. 414; 72
Telfair Shipping Corp. v. lntersea Carriers S.A.; Carolina P, The (1985} 129 S.J. 283; L.J.K.B. 834; 89 L.T. 196; 52 W.R.143; 19 T.L.R. 677. . . . . . . . . . . 14·002, 14-020
[1985) 1 All E.R. 243; [1984] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 467; (1985) 82 L.S. Gaz. Tooth v. Hallett (1869) 4 Ch. App. 242; 38 L.J.Ch. 396; 20 L.T. 155; 19 L.T. 309; 17
1781. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.251, L254, 4.289, 4.290 W.R. 423.. 12·031, 14·043, 14-050, 16·062, 16·063
Temloc Ltd. v. Errill Properties Ltd. (1988) 39 B.L.R 30; (1988) 4 Const. L.J. 63 Tool Metal Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Tungsten Electric Co. Ltd. [1955] 1 W.L.R.
C.A.. · · · · · · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.023, 10.079 761; [1955] 2 All E.R. 657; 99 S.J. 470; 72 R.P .C. 209; [18 M.L.R. 609; 105 L.J.
Tennent v. Glasgow (Earl) (1864) 2 Macph. (H.L.) 22; 36 Sc. Jur. 400 . . . . . . . . 4.265 20; 220 L.T. 144], H.L. reversing [1954] 1 W.L.R. 862; [1954} 2 All E.R. 28; 98
Tergeste, The [1903} P. 26; 72 L.J.P. 18; 87 L.T. 567; 9 Asp. M.C. 356....... 4.032, 4.033 S.J. 389; 71 R.P.C. 201; [1 Business L.R. 97], C.A.; [1954] C.L.Y. 618; restor-
Tersons v. Stevenage Development Corporation [1965] 1 Q.B. 37; [1964} 2 W.L.R. ing (1953) 71 R.P.C.1 . . 1·256
225; 107 S.J. 852; [1963] 3 AllE.R. 863; [1963] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 333; [1963] R.A. Tombergee Construction v. U.S. 420 F. 2nd 1027, 1046 (1970) . . . 8·199
TorridgeDistrict Council v. Turner (Michael) 90L.G.R.173; (1992) 156J.P.N. 636;
393. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.009, 4.132,4.134, 7.053, 8.064, 18.176
(1991) 59 BLR 31, Q.B., D.C.; The Times, November 27, 1991, D.C. . . . . 2·149
Tew v. Newbold-on-Avon United District School Board (1884) 1 C. & E.
Tout & Finch, Re. [1954] 1 W.L.R. 178; 98 S.J. 62; {1954] 1 All E.R. 127; 52 L.G.R.
260 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.032, 10.041 70. . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·079, 8·080, 8·081, 8·084, 13·124, 13·126, 13·130, 14-044, 16·054
Tharsis Sulphur and Copper Co. v. McE!roy (1878) 3 App. Cas. 1040; 5.R. (Ct. of Toward, Re, ex parte Moss (1884) 14 Q.B.D. 310; 54 L.J.Q.B.126; 52 L.T. 188. ... 14·044,
Sess. Cas.) 161. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.295, 3.052, 4.039, 4.041, 4.046, 4.047, 4.051, 16·062, 16.063
4.053, 4.054, 4.057, 4.060, 4.061, 4.095, 6.187, 7.028, 7.044, 7.055, Town & City Properties (Development) v. Wiltshire Southern and Gilbert Powell
7.059, 7.060, 7.074, 7.123 (1988) 44 BLR 109. . . 18·132, 18·143, 18·148, 18.149, 18·151, 18·159, 18·161, 18·162
Thomas v. Hammersmith Borough Council 82 S.J. 583; [1938] 2 All E.R. 203 2.049, Town ofMulgrave v. Simcoe & Erie General Insurance Co. (1977) 73 D.L.R. (3d)
2.261, 2.262 272. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17·043, 17·044
- - v. Thomas (1842) 2 Q.B. 8511842 F. & K. 621 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.070 Town of Truro v. Toronto General Insurance {1974] S.C.R. 1129. . . . . . 17·023
Thomas & Co. v. Portsea S.S. Co. [1912] A.C. 1. ........ 13.106, 18.027, 18.032, 18.033 Townsend v. Stone Toms and Partners (1984) 128 S.J. 659; (1985) 27 Build. L.R. 26;
Thompson v. Alexander & Partners (1992) 59 Build. L.R. 81 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.362 (1984) 81 L.S. Gaz. 2293, C.A................ 2·095, 2·096, 2·155, 2·215, 2·220
- v . Lohan (T.) (Plant Hire) andHurdiss (J.W.) Ltd. [1987] 1 W.L.R. 649; [1987] Townsend (Builders) Ltd. v. Cinema News Property Management [1959] 1 W.L.R.
2 All E.R. 631; (1987) 131 SJ. 358; [1988] T.L.R. 65; [1987] J.R.L.R. 148; 119; 1231.P.115; 103 S.J. 74;57L.G.R l74;subnom. Towsends (Builders) v.
(1987) 84 L.S. Gaz. 979, C.A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.241, 1.242 Cinema News and Property Management (David A. Wilkie & Partners,
Thomson v. Cremin (1941) [1956] 1 W.L.R. 103n; {1953] 2 All E.R. 1185; 100 S.J. Third Party) [1959] 1 All E.R. 7. 1·206, 1·283, 2·147, 2·151, 2·198, 4·115,
73, sub nom. Cremin v. Thomson (1941) 71 Ll.L. Rep. 1; 1956 S.L.T. 357, 4·274, 4-281
H.L. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.333 Townsville Hospital Board, Ex parte Jennings Industries Re {1981J 2 Q.R.
Thorman (Patricia) v. New Hampshire Insurance Co. [1988] 1 F.T.L.R. 30; [1988] 1 592. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . 13·076, 13·081, 13· 82, 13·083, 13·088
Lloyd's Rep. 7; (1988) 39 BLR 41, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15·037 TradaxExport S.A. v. Cerrahogullari T.A.S. [1981] 3 AllE.R. 344; [1981] Com. L.R.
Thorn v. London Corporation (1876) 1 App. Cas. 120; L.R. 9 Ex. 163; L.R 10 Ex. 144; [1981] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 169 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·090
Trade Indemnity Australia Ltd. v. Parkinson Air Conditioning (1994) 13 A.C.L.R.
112; 10 Ex. 44; 43 L.J.Ex.115; 44 L.J.Ex. 62; 45 LJ.Q.B. 487; 34 L.T. 545; 24 19, Qd. C.A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13·110, 13·114
W.R. 932; 40 J.P. 468 ........ 1·295, 4·020, 4·039, 4·041, 4·045, 4-046, 4·047, 4·049, Trade Indemnity Co. v. Workington Harbour & Dock Board rI937j A.C. 1; 105
4·050, 4·051, 4·052, 4·053, 4·057, 4·060, 4·061, 4·095, 4· 101, 4· 113, 4.Z33, L.J.K.B.183; 41 Com. Cas.186; 154 L.T. 507;54 Ll.L.R.10~; f19 6] 1 AllE.R.
7·025 7·084 454. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·045, 6·016, 17·001, 17·008, 1"7·010, 17·011A, 17·0110,
Thornhill v. Neats (1860) 8 C.B(N.s.) 831; 2 L.T. 539; 125 R.R. 902 ........ 9·008,'9·010, 17·011E, 17·025, 17·026, 17·027
10·028, 10·040 Trafalgar-House Construction (Regions) v. General Surety & Guarantee (1994) 66
Thornton v. Place (1832) 1 M. & R. 218; 42 R.R. 781. . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-015, 4·022, 8· 158 BLR42, C.A ..... 17·011A, 17·0118, 17·011C, 17·011E, 17·011F, 17·012, 17·012A,
Thornton Hall v. Wembley Electrical Appliances [1947] 2 All E.R. 630..... 2·235, 6·099, 17·013, 17·015, 17·016, 17·029, 17·063
6·140 Tramountana Armadora S.A. v. Atlantic Shipping.Co. S.A. [1978] 2 All E.R. 870; 1
Thoroughgood's Case, Thoroughgood v. Cole (1584) 2 Co. Rep. 9a; 1 And.129; 76 Lloyd's Rep. 391. . . . 18{MJ5, 18·180, 18· 184, 18· 186, 18· 187, 18· 188, 18· 189,
E.R. 408; sub nom. Throwgood v. Turner, Moore K.B. 148 . . . . . . . . . . . 1·100 18·194
Thyssen (Great Britain) v. Afan Borough Council (1978) 15 Build. L.R. 98, C.A. 18·179 Trans Trust S.P.R.L. v. Danubian Trading Co. [1952] 2 Q.B. 297; [1952] 1 T.L.R
Tidy v. Mollett (1864) 16 C.B.(N.s.) 298; 10 Jur.(N.s.) 800; 33 L.J.C.P. 235; 10 L.T. 1066; 96 S.J. 312; [1952] 1 All E.R. 970; [1952] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 348; C.A.;
380; 12 W.R. 802; 139 R.R. 497 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,020 reversing in part [1952] 1 K.B. 285; [1952] 1 T.L.R 13; [1952] 1 All E.R. 89;
Timber Shipping Co. S.A. v. London and Overseas Freighters [1972] A.C.1; [1971] [1951) 2 Lloyd's Rep. 644, 1 C.L.C. 9206. . . . . . . . . 8·093
2 W.L.R. 1360; [1971] 2 All E.R. 599; sub nom. London & Overseas Freight- Transatlantic Financing Corporation v. U.S. 363 F. (2d) 316 (1966) . . . . 4·237
ers v. Timber Shipping Co., 115 S.J. 404; [1971] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 523, H.L. . . 8·090 Traynor v. Panan Contractors Ltd. (1988) 7 A.C.L.R. 47......... 6·164, 18·144, 18·165
Tingay v. Harris [1967] 2 Q.B. 327; [1967] 2 W.L.R. 577; 110 S.J. 926; [1967] 1 All Travers v. Cooper (1915) 1 K.B. 73. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15·015, 15·041, 15·042
Tredegar v. Harwood [1929) A.C. 72; 97 L.J.Ch. 392; 139 L.T. 642; 44 T.L.R.
E.R. 385; [1966] C.L.Y. 2053 C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·185
790. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5·019, 6'025
Tins Industrial Co. Ltd. v. Kono Insurance Ltd. (1988) 4Const. L.J. Hong Kong Qi,
Trendberth (John) v. National Westminster Bank (1979) 39 P. & C.R. 104; (1979)
of Appeal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-009, 17·010, 17·011C, 17·011E 123 SJ. 388; (1979) 253 E.G.151. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·341, 1·342
 T
ex TABLE OF CASES TABLE OF CASES cxi
Trendtex Trading Corp. v. Credit Suisse [1982] A.C. 679; [1981J 3 W.L.R. 766; U.S. v. Foley 329 U.S. 64 (1945). . 1·189, 4·156
(1981) 125 S.J. 761; [1981] 3 All E.R. 520; (1981] Com. L.R. 262, H.L.; affirm- - v . Rice 317 U.S. 61 (1942). . . 1·189, 4·156
mg [1980] Q.B. 629; [1980] 3 W.L.R. 367; (1980) 124 S.J. 396; [1980] 3 All - - v. Rogers & Rogers (1958) 393 S.E. (2d) 830, California . . . . . . 1·305
E.R. 721, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14·025 - - v. Spearin 248 U.S. 132 (1918). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·047, 4·061
Trentham G. Percy Ltd. v. Archital Luxfer Ltd. and others (1992) 63 BLR 44, - v . Walsh (1902) 115 Fed. Rep. 697 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17·049
C.A.. · · - .......................................... 1·041 1·043 U.S. Leslie Salt Co. v. St. Paul Mercury Insurance 637 F. (2d) 657 (1981) U.S. Ct. of
Triangle Ltd. v. John Burrows Ltd. [1958] (3) S.A. 811. ......... 11-017, 11·030, lJ.103 Appeal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·149
Triden Contractors Ltd. v. Beluista Ltd. (1987) 3 B.C.L. 203. . . . . . . . . . . . 6· 197 6-203 Ultramares v. Touche (1922) 253 N.Y. 170 . . . . 1·281
Tr~dent Construction v. Wardrop [1979] 6 W.W.R. 481. ........... 1·298, 2·192'. 4·056 Ulysses Cia Naviera S.A. v. Huntingdon Petroleum Services, Ermoupolis, The,
Tndent General Insurance Co. v. McNiece Brothers (1988) 80 A.L.J.R. 574 . . . . 15.009 [1990] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 160 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·096
T~~ Joint.District School Board of Management v. Kelly [1914] A.C. 667 . . . . . 15·010 Union Construction Ltd. and Nova Scotia Power Corporation (1980) 111 D.L.R.
T~nlty Umversal Insurance Co. v. Gould 258 F. 2nd 883 (1958) . . . . . . . . . . . . 17·039 (3d) 728 . . . . . . 8·080
Tnple A Investments v. Adams Bros. (1985) 23 D.L.R. (4th) 587 . . . . . . . . . . . 4-103 United City Merchants (Investments) and Glass Fibres and Equipments v. Royal
Tripp v. Armitage (1839) 4 M. & W. 687; 1 H. & H. 442; 3 Jur.(o.s.) 249; 8 L.J.Ex. Bank of Canada, Vitrorefuertos S.A. and Banco Continental S.A.;
107; 51 R.R. 762... 11·007, 11·011, 11·019, 11·026, 11·030, American Accord, The, [1983] A.C.168; [1982] 2 W.L.R. 1039; [1982} 2 All
11·059, 12·063, 12·066, 16·039 E.R. 720; [1982] Lloyd's Rep. 1; [1982] Com. L.R. 142, H.L.; reversing [1981]
Trollope and Coils v. North West Metropolitan Regional Hospital Board [1973] 1 3 W.L.R. 242; (1981) 125 S.J. 413; [1981] 3 All E.R.142; [1981] 1 Lloyd's Rep.
W.L.R. 601; 117 S.J. 355; [1973] 2 All E.R. 260, H.L.. . . . . . . . 1·042, 1·180, 1·195, 604; (1981] Com. L.R. 98, C.A.; affirming [1979] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 267 ...... 17·056,
. 1 ·220, 4·156, 4·190, 10·062, 10·091A 17·067, 17·068
- - v. Srnger (1913), Hudson, Building Contracts (4th ed.), Vol. l, p. 849 ....... 1·045, University of Glasgow v. Whitfield & Laing Construction (1988) 42 BLR 66 ...... 2·108,
1·059, 4·181, 10·091 2·109, 2·222, 4·103
Trollope & Colls Ltd. v. Atomic Power Constructions Ltd. [1963] 1 W.L.R. 333; 107 University of Regina v. Pettick (1991) 79 D.L.R. 3d 615. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·359, 2·120
S.J. 254; [1962] 3 All E.R. 1035...... 1·032, 1·041, 1·208, 3·058, 3·059, 3·067, 3·068 University of Warwick v. Sir Robert MacAlpine (1988) 42 BLR 1. ............ 4-098,
Troncello v. U.S. 681 F. 2nd 756. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12·014, 12·015 4·108, 13·029, 13·063
Trov.:sdale v. Jopp (1865) 2 M. (Ct. of Sess. Cas.) 1334; 4 ibid. 31 . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,099 Update Constn1ction Ltd. v. Rozelle Child Care Centre (1990) 9 A.C.L.R.
Tsakrroglou & Co. v. Noblee Thor! G.m.b.H. [1962] A.C. 93; [1961] 2 W.L.R. 633; 66. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·248, 1·269
105 S.J. 346; [1961] 2 All E.R. 179; [1961] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 329, H.L.; affirming Upsdell v. Stewart (1794) Peake N.P. 255; 3 R.R. 685. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·257, 2·268
[1960] 2 Q.B. 348; [1960] 2 W.L.R. 869; 104 S.J. 426; [1960] 2 All E.R. 160; Utica City National Bank v. Gunn (1918) 118 N.E. 607. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·184, 1·216
[1960] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 349; [1960] C.L.Y. 535, C.A.; affirming [1960] 2 Q.B. Uxbridge Permanent.Benefit. Building Society v. Pickard [1939] 2 K.B. 248; 108
318; [1959] 2 W.L.R. 179; 103 S.J. 112; [1959] 1 All E.R. 45; [1958] 2 Lloyd's L.J.K.B. 757; 160 L.T. 407; 83 S.J. 297; 55 T.L.R. 579; [1939] 2 All E.R.
Rep. 515; [1959] C.L.Y. 539 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·175 344 . . . . . . 2·232
Tubeworkers Ltd. v. Tilbury Construction (1985) 30 BLR 67; [1985} C.I.L.L. 187;
(1985) 1 Const. L.J. 385 C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·006, 6·199
Tucker v. Linger (1883) 8 App. Cas. 508; 49 L.T. 373; 52 L.J.Ch. 941; 48 J.P. 4; 32
W.R.40,H.L.......................................... 1·201 Van der Zijden Wildhandel (P.J.) N.V. v. Tucker & Cross [1976] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 341;
Tullis v. Jacson [1892] 3 Ch. 441; 61 L.J.Ch. 655; 67 L.T. 340; 41 W.R. 11; 8 T.L.R: for previous proceedings see [1975] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 240.......... 18·012, 18·134
691;36S.J.646. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·165,6·106 Vawdrey v. Simpson [1896} 1 Ch.166 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·104
Turcan, Re (1888) 40 Ch.D. 5; 58 L.J.Ch. 101; 59 L.T. 712; 37 W.R. 70 14·058 Vermont Construction Ltd. v. Beatson (1976) 57 D.L.R. (3d) 95 ... 1 ·296, 1·296A, 1·306A
Turner v. Diaper (1841) 2 M. & G. 241; 2 Scott N.R. 447 . . . . . . . . . . . 8·087 Verona Construction v. Frank Ross Construction [1961] S.C.R.195, Canada . . . 4·210
--v. Garland (1853) (4th ed.) Vol. 2, p. 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... 2·091, 2-099 Vogan v. Barry (1908) 7 W.L.R. 811 (Canada) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8°166
Turner Corporation v. Austoted Ltd. (1992) 11 A.C.L.R. 156 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·093 Voli v. Inglewood Shire Council (1963) 56 Q.L.R. 256; [1963] A.L.R. 657; [27
Turner (East Asia) v. Builders Federal (Hong Kong) and Josef Gartner (1988) 42 M.L.R. 216]. . . . . . . . ... . ... 1·311, 1·314, 1·317, 2·124
BLR 122, High Ct. Singapore...... 18·141, 18·146, 18·147, 18·149, 18·151, 18·160 Von Hatzfeldt-Wildenberg v. Alexander [1912] 1 Ch. 284; {1911-13] AIIE.R. Rep.
Turner and Goudy v. McConnell [1985] 1 W.L.R. 898; (1985) 129 S.J. 467; [19851 148; 81 LJ.Ch. 184; sub nom. Hatzfeldt v. Alexander 105 L.T. 434 . . . . . . 1·057
2 All E.R. 34; (1985) 30 Build. L.R. 108; (1985) 1 Const. L.J. 392, Victoria, and Kong Wah Housing Development S.D.B. v. Desplan Construction
C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·122, 18·196 Trading [1991) 2 L.J. 117 Malaysia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·305
Turner and Sons Ltd. v. Mathind Ltd. (1986) 5 Const. L.J. 273. . . . 10.005, 10·061, 10·062 Victoria Laundry (Windsor) v. Newman Industries [1949] 2 K.B. 528; 65 T .L.R. 274;
Tu~ock v. Sarto~is (1889) 43 Ch.D. 150; 62 L.T. 209; 38 W.R. 340....... 18·096, 18·108 93 SJ. 371; [1949] 1 All E.R. 997. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·109, 8·117, 8°167, 8·179
Turnff Constructmn Ltd. v. Regalia Knitting Mills Ltd. (1971) 222 E.G. 169...... 3·071, Victoria University of Manchester v. Hugh Wilson and Lewis Womersley (a firm)
(1984) 1 Const. LJ. 162; 2 Const. L.R. 43 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·103
3·059
Tuta Products v. Hutcherson Bros. (1972) 46 A.L.J.R. 119......... 1·203, 3·020, 13·093 Vigers, Sons & Co. Ltd.-v. Swindell [1939] 3 All E.R. 590......... 2>061, 13·038, 13·039
Twickenham Garden Developments v. Hounslow L.B.C. (19711 Ch. 233 . . . . . . 6·123 Viking Grain Storage v. White (T.H.) Installations (1985) 33 Build. L.R. 103; [1985]
Twins Transport Ltd. v. Patrick and Brocklehurst (trading as H.V. & C. Patrick C.I.L.L. 206; (1985) 3 Con. L.R. 52. . . . . . . . . 3·026, 3·027, 3·028, 4·073, 4-096
Estates Developers) (1984) 25 Build. L.R. 65 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13·045 Viney v. Bignold (1888) 20 Q.B.D. 172 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·036
Tyers v. Rosedale and Ferryhill Iran Co. (1875) L.R. 10 Ex. 195; 44 L.J.Ex.130; 33 Vitex Manufacturing Corporation v. Caribtex Corporation 377 F. (2nd) 795 (1967)
L.T. 56; 23 W.R. 871. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9·009, 9·020 U.S. Ct. of App. 3rd Circuit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3·047, 8·178, 8·179

U.B.A.F. Ltd. v. European American Banking Corporatioil' Pacific Colocotronis W.R.B. Corporation v. U.S. 183 C. & Cl. 409 (1968) ........ . 8·203
Th, [1984] Q.B. 713; [1984] 2 W.L.R. 508; [1984] 2 All E.R. 226; (1984) 128 W.T. Malouf Pty. Ltd. v. Brinds Ltd. (1981) 52 F.L.R. 442 ..... . 10·018
S.J. 243; [1984] 1 Lloyd's Rep. 258; (1984) 81 L.S. Gaz. 429; [1984] BCLC 112, Waddle v. Wallsend [195212 Lloyd's Rep.105 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·333
C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·307 Wade v. Simeon (1846) 2 C.B. 548; 3 Dow. & L. 587; 15 L.J.C.P. 114; 6 L T.O.S. 346;
U.S v Algenon Blair 329 F Supp 1360 (1970) . . . 17·020 10 Jur. 412; 135 E.R. 1061 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·079
- - v Atlantic Dredgmg 253 U.S. 1 (1928) . . . . ... ~ -~ 4·061 Wade-Gery v. Morrison (1877) 37 L.T. 270 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18°026
--v. Blair 321 U.S. 730 (1944) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·156 Wadey v. Mort's Dock and Engineering Co. [1902] 2 N.S.W.S.R. 391, (1905) 22
- - v. Corliss Steam Engineering Corporation 91 U.S. 321 (1876) ... . 12·014 T.L.R.61 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . · · · · · · · · · · 6'013
 cxii TABLE OF CASES TABLE OF CASES cxiii
Wadsworth v.Lydall (1981] 1 W.L.R. 598; (1981) 125 S.J.309; [1981] 2All E.R.401, Watts v. Morrow {1991] 1 W.L.R.1421; [1991] 4AIIE.R. 937; (1991) 23H.L.R. 608;
C.A. 8·093 54BLR86; [1991]2E.G.L.R.152; [1991]43E.G.121;26Con. L.R. 98; [1991]
Waghorn v. Wimbledon Local Board (1877), (4th ed.), Vol. 2, p. 52 . . 2·069 E.G.C.S. 88; (1991) 141 New L.J. 1331; [1991] N.P.C. 98; [1992] Gazette,
Wakefield, etc. v. Namanton Local Board (1881) 44 L.T. 697....... 6-109, 6·139, 14-053 January 8, 33; The Independent, August 20, 1991; The Guardian, September
Waldon v. Maryland Casualty Co. 116 S.C. 828 (1923) 17·033 4, 1991, C.A.; reversing [1991] 14E.G. lll; [1991] 15 E.G. 113;24 Con. L.R.
Walker, Re, ex parte. Barter. See Barter, ex parte 125................ 2·210, 2·211, 2·212, 2·213, 8·143, 8·150, 8·159, 8·160, 8-161
--v. Black (1879) 5 Viet. L.R. (Law) 77 . . . . . . . 6-155 - - v. Shuttleworth {1861) 7 H. & N. 353; 7 Jur.{N.s.) 945; 5 L.T. 58; 10 W.R. 132;
--v. London and North WesternRly. Co. (1876) 1 C.P.D. 518;45LJ.C.P. 787; 36 126 R.R. 471 ........................ ·. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17-028
L.T. 53; 25 W.R. 10. . . . . . 12·011, 12·012, 12.047, 12·048, 12·049, Waugh, Re exparte Dickin (1876) 4 Ch.D. 524; 46 L.J. Bk. 26;35 L.T. 769; 25 W.R.
12-051, 12-064, 12·065, 12-066 258 .............. 11·022, 11·037, 11·041, 11-049, 11·060, 16·037, 16-041, 16·042
WalJace v. Brandon and Byshottles Urban District Council (1903), (4th ed.), Vol. 2, Weatherstone v. Robertson (1852) 1 Stuart M. & P. (Sc.) 333 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-040
p. 362 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·040 Websterv. Bosanquet [1912] A.C. 394;81 LJ.P.C. 205; 106 L.T. 357;28 T.L.R. 271 10·006
Wallace (James) v. William Cable Ltd. [1980] 2 N.Z.L.R. 187............ 1·076, 1·078 --v. Cecil (1861) 30 Beav. 62; 132 R.R. 185; 54 E.R. 812 . 1·097
Wallbridge v.Moore(W.H.) & Co. Ltd., W.H.Moore&Co.Ltd. v.Baldry(1964)48 Weeks v. Rector of Trinity Church (1900) 67 N.Y.S. 670, New York. 4-166, 4·168
W.W.R. 321, Canada... 1·146 Wegematic v. U.S. 360 F. (2d) 674 (1964) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·237
Wallis v. Robinson (1862) 3 F. & F. 307; 130 R.R. 841. ............... 7·072.13-031 Weibking,Re, exparte Ward. [1902] 1 K.B. 713; 71 L.J.K.B.389; 86 L.T. 455;50 W.R.
Walnut Creek Aggregate v. Testing Engineers (1967) 248 Cal. App. (2d) 690, 460; 9 Mans.131. ......................... 11-027, 11·035, 11·036, 11·050
California . . . 1-305 Welsh Health Technical Services Organisation v. Haden Young (I.D.C., third
Walsh Canadian Corporation v. Churchill Falls Corporation (1979) 25 N.Fld. & party) (1987) 37 Build.L.R. 130 D.C.................. 13·020, 13·043, 13°054
P.E.I.R. 361............. . ..... 8·198, 8·201, 8·206 Wells v. Army andNavyCo-OperativeSociety(l902) 86L.T. 764; (4th ed.), Vol. 2,
Walter Cabott Construction v. The Queen (1974) 44 D.L.R. 3d 82, 90...... 4·133, 7·014 p. 346........... 2·133, 4·146, 4-147, 7·050, 9-038, 10-029, 10·034, 10·036, 10-040
Walter & Sullivan v. Murphy (J.) & Sons {1955] 2Q.B. 584; [1955] 2 W.L.R. 919; 99 Wells {Merstham) v. Buckland Sand and Silica Co. [1965] 2 Q.B. 170; [1964] 2
S.J. 290; [1955] 1 All E.R. 843, C.A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.019 W.L.R. 453; 108 S.J. 177; [1964] 1 All E.R. 41 .. 13-020
Walters v. Whessoe and Shell (1960) 6 Build. L.R. 23, C.A.. 1·235, 15·048, 15-049, Wertheim v. Chicoutimi Pulp Co. [1911] A.C. 301 8·226
15·051, 15·053, 15·057, 15·059 West Coast Transmission v. Ipoco (1985) (Unrep.) ... 1·378
Walton-on-the-Naze Urban District Council & Moran, Re (1905) (4th ed.), Vol. 2, Westcott v. J.H. Jenner (Plasterers) Ltd. {1962) 106 S.J. 281 ............. . 15-042
p. 376. . .. 4-041, 7·021, 7·022 Westerhold v. Carroll (1967) 419 S.W. (2d) 73, Missouri ................. . 1·305
Waltons Stores (Interstate) Ltd. v. Maher (1988) 164 C.L.R. 387 76 A.L.R. Western Waggon and Property Co. v. West [1892] 1 Ch. 271; 61 L.J.Ch.244; 66 L.T.
513........ . .. 1·246, 1-255 402; 40 W.R. 182; 8 T.L.R. 112 . . . . . . . . . . . . 14·042
Wangler v. Swift (1882) 90 N.Y. 38 . . . . 6·179
Westerton, Re, Public Trustee v. Gray [1919) 2 Ch. 104; 88 L.J.Ch. 392; 122 L.T. 264;
Wansbeck Railway v. Trowsdale (1866) L.R. 1 C.P. 269; 12 Jur.(N.s.) 740 . . . 6·178
63 S.J,., 410 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14·016
War Service Houses (Director of) v. Harris (1968) Qd. R. 275 8·127 Westlake v. Bracknell District Council (1987) 19 Housing L.R. 375; {1987) 282 E.G.
Ward v. Calvert {1837) 7 A. & D.143 . . . . . . . . . . 17·043
868; [1987]! E.G.L.R. 161. .... 2-109, 2·222
--v. Cannock Chase District Council [1986] Ch.546; [1986] 2 W.L.R. 660; (1986) Westminster Chemicals &Produce Ltd. v. Eichholz&Loeser [1954] 1 Lloyd's Rep.
130 SJ. 316; [1985] 3 All E.R. 537; (1986) 84L.G.R. 898; (1986) 83 L.S. Ga,. 99......................... . ....... 18·006, 18-117, 18-155
1553. . . . . . .... 8·108, 8-134, 8·136, 8·140, 8-141, 8·143, 8·160
Westminster Corporation v.Jarvis (J.) & Sons [1970] 1 W.L.R. 637; 68 L.G.R.470;
--v. Duncombe {1893] A.C.369;62L.J.Ch. 881; 1 R. 224;69L.T.121;42W.R.59 14-046
sub nom. Westminster City Council v. Jarvis (J.) & Sons [1970] 1 All E.R.
Ward v. National Bank of New Zealand (1883) 8 App. Cas. 755; 52 L.J.P.C. 65; 49
943,H.L.; reversingsubnom. Jarvis (J.) &Sons v. Westminster City Council
L.T. 315. 17·079
[1969] 1 W.L.R. 1448; 113 S.J. 755; [1969] 3 All E.R. 1025, C.A.; reversing
Wardens and Commonalty of the Mystery of Mercers of the City of London v. New {1968) 118 New L.J. 590; The Times, June 18, 1968.............. 1·009, 2·168,
Hampshire Insurance Co., [1992] 1 W .L.R. 792; [1992] 3 All E.R. 57; {1992] 2 4·005, 4·012, 4·020, 4-029, 4-269, 5·037, 5-048, 5-053, 9·007, 10-059,
Lloyd's Rep. 365; Financial Times, June 4, 1992, C.A.; reversing [1991] 1 10·091A, 10·098, l0.099, 13·008, 13·010, 13·026, 13·057, 13·059, 13·061
W.L.R. 1173; {1991] 4 AllE.R. 542; (1991)135 S.J. 541; {1992] 1 Lloyd's Rep. Westwood v. Secretary of State for India (1863) 7L.T. 736; 11 W.R.261; 1 N.R.262;
431; (1991) 7 Const. L.J. 130; The Times, March 22, 1991. ........ 3·071, 17·005, 132 R.R. 810. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6°038, 10·029, 10-032
17-009, 17·010, 17·011E, 17·013, 17·019, 17·052 Wethered v. French (1967) 203 E.G. 431 2·152
Ware v. Lyttelton Harbour Board (1882) 1 N.Z.L.R.S.C. 191 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·074 Whaley v. Milton 241 S.W. (2d) 23 (1951) 4-106
Waring v. Manchester Railway (1949) 7 Hare482; 18 L.J.Ch. 450; 14Jur.(o.s.) 613;2 Wharf Properties v. Eric Cumine Associates (No. 2) (1991) 52 BLR 1; P.C.. . . . . . 8·171,
Hall&Tw.239;82R.R.196 ..... . 6·107 8·200, 8·204, 8-207, 8-208, 8·211, 18-145,
Waring & Gillow Ltd. v. Thompson (1912) 29 T.L.R. 154 ..... . 4·303 18-146, 18-159, 18·159A, 18·159C, 18·160
Warley Ltd. v. Adco Constructions Ltd. (1988) 8 A.C.L.R. 73 .. . . ....... 18·022, Wharf Properties Ltd. v. Eric Cumine Associates (1984) 29 Build.L.R. 106 High Ct.
18·024, 18-176, 18-199 of Hong Kong. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-028, 7·118
Warner v. Basildon Development Corporation (1991) 7 Const. L.J. 146, Wheat v. Lacon (E.) & Co. [1966] A.C. 552; [1966] 2 W.L.R. 581; [1966] 1 All E.R.
C.A...... . .............. 1·361, 1·363 582; 110 S.J. 149; [1966] R.V.R. 223; [1966] R.A. 193; [82 L.Q.R. 465], H.L.;
Wates Construction {London) Ltd. v. Frantham Property Ltd. (1991) 53 BLR 23; affi,ming [1966] 1 Q.B. 335; [1965] 3 W.L.R. 142; [1965] 2 All E.R. 700; 109
(1991) 7 Const. L.J. 243, C.A.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·223, 8·084, 16·058 S.J. 334; [1965] C.L.Y. 2663; [28 M.L.R. 721; 236 L.T. 452], C.A...... 1·329, 1·335
Watson v. Canada Permanent Trust Co. (1972) 27 D.L.R. (3d) 735, British Colum- Wheeler v. Copas [1981] 3 All E.R. 405. . . . . . . . . .... 1·320, 1·336
bia Supreme Ct. . ..... 1-256 Wherry v. Hutcherson Ltd. (1987) Aust. Tort Rep. 80-107 N.S.W. . . . . . . . . . . 1·339
- - v. O'Beirne (1850) 7 U.C.Q.B. 345 ..... 7·082 Whitaker v. Dunn (1887) 3 T.L.R. 602. . . . . 4-011, 4-019, 4·020, 4-232, 5·003, 5·004, 5·011
Watson Lumber Co. v. Guenniwig226 N.E. 2nd 270. 278 (1967); Citing 13 Am.Jur. White v. Tarmac Civil Engineering {1967] 1 W.L.R.1508; 111 S.J. 831; [1967] 3 All
2nd.... . . . . 5·001, 7·006, 7·007, 7·093 E.R. 586, H.L.; reversing [1966] 1 W.L.R. 156; 109 S.J. 995; [1966] 1 AllE.R.
Watts v. McLeay (1911) 19 W.L.R. 916, (Canada) ............... 4-016, 61096, 6·113, 209; 64 L.G.R. 111, C.A.. . . 15·041, 15·043, 15·049
6°120, 6·129, 6·147, 8·118, 10·058, 10·079 - - v. Taupo Totara [1960] N.Z.L.R. 547 2·083
cxiv TABLE OF CASES TABLE OF CASES cxv
White and Arthur Re (1901) 84 L.T. 464; 17 T.L.R. 461 . . . . . . . . 10·011 Winter Garden Theatre (London) v. Millennium Productions [1948] A.C. 173;
Whitehousev.Jordan [1981] 1 W.L.R.246; (1980) 1258.1.167; [1981] 1 AllE.R.267; [1947] L.J.R.1422; 177L.T. 349; 63 T.L.R. 529; 91 S.J. 504; [1947} 2 All E.R.
H.L. affirming [1980] 1 All E.R. 650 C.A ...................... 2·087, 2·098 331; H.L.; reversing (1946) 115 L.J.Ch. 297; restoring (1946) 115 L.J.Ch.
Whitlock v. Brew [1968] C.L.R. 445 . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·052 185 .................................. . 12·091
Whitmore v. Mason (1861) 2 J. & H. 204; 8 Jur.(N.s.) 278; 31 L.J.Ch. 433; 10 W.R. Winterbottom v. Wright (1842) 10 M. & W. 109; 11 LJ.Ex. 415; 62 R.R. 534; 152
168; 5 L.T. 631; 134 R.R. 190 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16-038 E.R.402 ................................... . 1·314
Whittal Builders Co. Ltd. v. Chester-Le-Street District Council 40 BLR 82; 11 Con. Wisbech Rural District Council v. Ward [1927] 2 K.B. 55~; [1928] 2 K.B. 1; 97
L.R.40,D.C. 8·189 L.J.K.B. 56; 138 L.T. 308; 91 J.P. 200; 26 L.G.R. 10; 44 T.L.R. 62 6·188
Whittington v. Seale-Hayne (1900) 82 L.T. 49; 16 T.L.R. 181; 44 S.J. 229. . . . 1·150, 1·152 With v. O'Flanagan [1936] Ch. 575; [1936] l All E.R. 727; 105 L.J.Ch. 247; 154 L.T.
Whitworth Street Estates (Manchester) v. Miller (James) & Partners . . . . . . . . 18·084 634; 80 S.J. 285, C.A.....
Wickman Machine Sales Tool v. Schuler (L.) A.G. See Schuler (L.) A.G. v. Wick- Wolf v. Collis Removal Service [1948] 1 K.B. 11 .................. .
man Machine Tool Sales Wolverhampton Corporation v. Emmons [1901] 1 K.B. 515; 17 T.L.R. 234; 70
Widnes Foundry (1929) Ltd. v. Cellulose Acetate Silk Co. [1931] 2 K.B. 393; 100 L.J.K.B. 429; 84 L.T. 407; 49 W.R. 553; 45 S.J. 256. . . . . . . . . 4·300, 4·302, 4·303
L.J.K.B. 746; 145 L.T. 507; 47 T.L.R. 481; affirmed in H.L. [1933] A.C. 20; 48 Wong Lai Ying v. Chinachem Investments Co. (1979) 13 Build.L.R. 81 P.C.. . . . . 4·233,
T.L.R. 595 10·002 4·234, 4·236, 4·248, 4-258, 4·262, 4·263
Wigan Metropolitan Borough Council v. Sharkey Brothers (1988) 4 Const. L.J. 162 18·055 Wood v. Bell (1856) 6 E. & B.355; 25 L.J.Q.B. 321; 2Jur.(N.S.) 664;4 W.R.553; 103
Wilbeam v. Ashton (1807) 1 Camp. 78; 170 E.R. 883 ..... 10·016 R.R. 749 .... 11·012
Wilkie v. Hamilton Lodging House Company (1902) 4 F. (Ct. of Sess.) (5th - v . Grand Valley Railway (1916) 51 S.C.R. 283 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·197
ser.). . ...... 8.021, 8·049 - v. Hewitt (1846) 8 Q.B. 913; 15 L.J.Q.B. 247; 70 R.R. 689 11·016
- - v. Scottish Aviation Ltd., 1956 S.C. 198............... 2·245, 2·257, 2·259, 2·266
- v . Silcock (1884) 50 L.T. 251; 32 W.R. 845 . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-299
- - v. Stringer (1890) 20 Ont. Rep. 148. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5·004, 8·124
Wilkes v. Thingoe Rural District Council (1954), (Unrep.).............. 2·160, 2·202
- - v. Tendring Rural Sanitary Authority (1886) 3 T.L.R. 272 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12·047
Wilkins & Davies v. Geraldine Borough (1958) {1958] N.Z.L.R. 985 ........... 4-051, Wood Hall Ltd. v. Pipeline Authority (1979) 141 C.L.R. 443; (1979) 53 A.L.J.R.
4·055, 4·233, 4·254, 7·025 487................................... 17·005, 17·055, 17·072, 17·073
Wilkinson, Re, exparte. Fowler (1905] 2 K.B. 713; 74 L.J.K.B. 969; 54 W.R. 157; 12 Wood-Hopkins v. Masonry Contractors 235 So. (2d) 548 (1970) . . . 4·106
Mans. 377.......................... 8·079, 13·123, 13·126, 16·041, 16·055 Woodar Investment Development v. Wimpey Construction U.K. [1980] 1 W.L.R.
Wilkinson v. Clements (1872) L.R. 8 Ch. 96;42 L.J.Ch. 38; 27 L.T. 834; 21 W.R. 90 4·297 277; (1980) 124 SJ. 184; [1980] 1 All E.R. 571 H.L. . .............. . 4·217
William Brothers v. Agius Ltd. [1914] A.C. 510. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·226 Woods v. Russell (1822) 5 B. & Aid. 942; 1 D. & R. 58; 24 R.R. 621 ....... . 12·082
William Lacey (Hounslow) v. Davis. See Lacey (William) (Hounslow) v. Woodward v. Gyles (1690) 2 Vernon 119 .. 10·001
Davis. . . . 3·076, 8· 104 Woolfe v. Wexler [1951] 2 K.B. 154; [1951] 1 T.L.R. 794; 115 J.P. 202; 95 S.J.171;
William Tomkinson v. The Parochial Council of St. Michael (1990) 6 Const. L.J. [1951] 1 All E.R. 635; 49 L.G.R. 307 ........................ . 4·277
319. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......................... 4·293, 5.049 Woollatt Fuel & Lumber (London) v. Matthews Group (1978) 83 D.L.R. (3d) 137
Williams v. Atlantic Assurance Co. Ltd. [1933] 1 K.B. 81; 102L.J.K.B. 241; 37 Com. Ontario H.C.J................................... 4·227, 8·222, 12·017
Cas. 304; 148 L.T. 313; 48 Ll. L. Rep. 177. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14·015, 14·044 Woollertonand Wilson Ltd. v. Costain (Richard) Ltd. [1970] 1 W.L.R. 411; 1148.J.
--v. Fitzmaurice (1858) 3 H. & N. 844; 32 L.T.(o.s.) 149; 117 R.R. 1004....... 4-040, 170; [34 Conv.130;33 M.L.R. 552] ......................... 1·341, 1·342
7·010, 7·013, 11·007, 11·013 Woollongong City Council v. Fregnan (1982) 1 N.S.W.L.R. 244 8·135
- - v. Roffey & Nicholls (Contractors) [1991] 1 Q.B. 1; [1990] 2 W.L.R. 1153; Worbuoys v. Acme Investments (1969) 210 E.G. 335 . . . . . . . 2·100
[1990] 1 AllE.R. 512; 48BLR69; (1991) lOTr. L.R. 12; (1989) 139New L.J. Workington Harbour & Dock Board v. Towerfi.eld (Owners) [1951] A.C. 112;
1712; [1990] L.S. Gaz. March 28, 36, C.A............. 1·069, 7·011, 7·024, 7·025 [1950) 2 AIIE.R. 414; 66 T.L.R. (Pt. 2) 387;sub nom, The Towerfield, 94 S.J.
Williams and Williams v. Coatsworth (1955) 105 L.J.124....... . 2·064, 7·072 517; sub nom. Towerfield (Owners) v. Workington Harbour and Dock
Willment Brothers Limited v. North West Thames Regional Health Authority Board, 84 LI. L. Rep. 233, H.L.; reversing sub nom. Towerfield (Owners) v.
(1984) 26 Build. L.R. 51, C.A .. 16-016 Workington Harbour and Dock Board (1949] P. 10; [1948] L.J.R. 1645; 92
Wilson v. United Counties Bank [1920] A.C. 102 ........ . S.J. 555; [1948] 2All E.R. 736; 81 LL L. Rep. 419, C.A.; reversing (1947) 80 LI.
8·115
- - v. Wallace (1859) 21 Ct. of Sess. Cas. (2nd ser.) D. 507 .......... . L. Rep. 488 ........ . 1·329
4·112 - - v. Trade Indemnity (No. 2) [1937] 3 All E.R. 39 ............... .
- v. Wilson (1854) 5 H.L.C. 40; 23 L.J.Ch. 697 ......... . 17·009
1·126 Workman, Clark & Co. v. Lloyd Brazileno [1908] 1 K.B. 968; 77 L.J.K.B. 953; 99
Wilson (Paul) & Co. AIS v. Partereederi Hannah Blumenthal, Hannah Blumenthal,
L.T. 477; 11 Asp. M.C.126;24 T.L.R. 458....................... 8·105
The, [1983] A.C. 854 .... 18·007 Wormald Engineering Ltd. v. Resources Conservation International (1988) 8
Wimpey Construction U.K. v. Poole (1984) 128 S.J. 969; [1984] 2 Lloyd's Rep. 499; B.C.L. 158. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4· 132, 7·054
(1985) 27 Build. L.R. 58................................ 2·090, 15·032 Warlock v. SAWS (a firm) (1983) 265 E.G. 774; (1983) 22 Build. L.R. 66 C.A.;
Wimpey (George) & Co. Ltd. v. British Overseas Airways Corporation [1955] A.C. (1981) 260 E.G. 920; (1982) 20 Build. L.R. 94. . . . . . . . . .... 1·351, 1·384, 4-103
169; [1954] 3 W.L.R. 932; [1954] 3 All E.R. 661; 98 S.J. 868; [71 L.Q.R. 163; 21 Worsley v. Wood (1796) 6 T.R. 710; 2 H. BL 574; 3 R.R. 323 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·146
Sol. 123; [1954] C.L.J. 50; [1956] C.L.J. 15J; H.L.; affirming sub nom. Little- Wraight v. P.H.T. Holdings (1968) 13 Build. L.R. 26. . ........... 8·096, 8·216
wood v. Wimpey (George) & Co. and British Overseas Airways Corpor- Wren v. Emmelts Contractors Pty. (1969) 43 A.L.J.R. 213..... . . . 17·042, 17·049
ation [1953] 2 Q.B. 501; [1953] 3 W.L.R. 553; 117 J.P. 484; 97 S.J. 587; [1953] 2 Wunderlich v. U.S. (1965) 351 F. (2d) 956......................... 7,088, 7·089
AllE.R. 915;51 L.G.R.557; {117 J.P.J. 753; 103L.J.267], [1953] C.L.Y. 2070, Wyett v. Smith (1908) 28 N.Z.L.R. 79. . ... 4-016, 4·018, 4·035
C.A.; affirming [1953] 1 W.L.R. 426; 97 S.J. 152; [1953J 1 All E.R. 583 1·381
--v. Territory Enterprises (1971) 45 A.L.J.R. 38. . . . . . . . . . . .... 1·141, 1·168
Yates v. Law (1866) 25 U.C.Q.B. 562 4-152
Wimshurst v. Deeley (1845) 2 C.B. 253 . . . . . 3·048
Yates Building Co. v. Pulleyn (R.J.) & Sons (York) (1975) 119 S.J. 370; (1975) 237
Winconsin Red Pressed Brick v. Hood 69 N.W. 1091 (1897) . . . . . 4·106
E.G. 183, C.A.; reversing (1973) 228 E.G. 1597 . . . . . 12·043
Windsor Rural District Council v. Otterway&Try [1954] l W.L.R.1494;988.J.871; Yeadon Waterworks and Wright, Re_(1895) 72 L.T. 538; affirmed by C.A.; 72 L.T.
[1954] 3 All E.R. 721; 53 L.G.R. 96. . . . 6·074, 6·081, 6·082, 6·084, 6·090, 6·091, 832. . 10·048, 10·049, 10·050, 10·052, 14·023
6-183 Yemen Salt Mining Corporation v. Rhodes Vaughan (1977) 10 A.R. 501 1·378
Winston Corporation v. Continental Casualty Co. (1975) 508 F. 2nd 1299 ... 17·033 Yeoman Credit v. Apps. [1962) 2 Q.B. 508; (1961] 3 W.L.R. 94; 105 S.J. 567; [1961] 2
Winter, Re. See Bolland, ex parte All E.R. 281; C.A. 5·020
cxvi TABLE OF CASES

Yeung Kai Yung v. Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corp. [1981) A.C. 787,P.C.;
[1980] 3 W.L.R. 950; (1980) 124 S.J. 591; [1980] 2 All E.R. 599, D.C.. 4·171,
15-039
Yianni v. Evans (Edwin) & Sons [1982) Q.B. 438; [1981] 3 W.L.R. 843; (1981) 259
E.G. 969; (1981) 125 S.J. 694...
Yonge v. Toynbee [1910] 1 K.B. 215; 79 L.J.K.B. 208; 102 L.T. 57; 26 T.L.R. 211 . 2·080
. .. 1·178, 1·287 TABLE OF STATUTES
York Condominium Corporation v. Rose Park Wellesley Investments (1985) 0.R.
(2d) 455 . .. .. .. . 1-237
Yorkshire Joinery Co., Re (in Liquidation) (1967) 111 S.J. 701; 117 New L.J. 652. 11·004
(References are to Paragraph numbers)
Yorkshire Water Authority v. (Sir Alfred) McAlpine Ltd. (1985) 32 Build.LR.
114. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-008, 7·032, 7·043, 8·068
Young v. Ballarat Water Commissioners (1878) 4 Viet. L.R. 306, 502; ibid. 1677 Statute of Frauds (29 Car.. 2 1893 Sale of Goods Act (56 & 57
503. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-215, 6·108, 6-147 c.3)- Vict.c. 71) ..... 1·183,4·119
- v. Blake (1887) (4th ed.), Vol.2, p. 110 8-019 s.4............ 1·270, 4·282 s.14. . . . . . . 4·066, 4·067, 4·084
- v. Buckett (1882) 51 L.J.Ch. 504; 46 L.T. 266; 30 W.R. 511. . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-107 Fires Prevention (Metrop· (2). .. ........ 4·124
- v . Buckles [1952] 1 K.B.220; [1952] 1 T.L.R. 271; 116J.P. 96;96 S.J.120; [1952) olis) Act (14 Geo. 3, s.18... . . ......... 11·009
1 All E.R. 354 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-277 c. 78) . . . . 4·279 s.25 ....... , , ....... 16·050
- - v. Kitchin (1878) 3 Ex.D. 127; 47 L.J.Ex. 579; 26 W.R. 493 .......... 8·118, 8°165, 1697 Arbitration Act (9 Will. 3 (1) .............. 11-057
9·006, 14·002, 14-022, 14·049, 14·050 c. 15). . . . . . . 18·013, 18·015 (2).... 11·030, 11·054
- v . Smith (1880) (4th ed.), Vol. 2, pp. 70, 75. . . 2·069, 2·287, 6·110 1833 Civil Procedure Act (3 & 4 s.31(2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9·003
- v. White (1911) 76 J.P. 14; 28 T.L.R. 87. 13·035, 13-036, 13·039, 13·072, 13·089 Will. 4 c. 42) ........ 18·013 1894 London Building Act (57 &
Young & Fehlhaber Pile Co. Inc. v. State of New York 177 Misc. 204 (1941) . . . . 4·061 s.25. . . . ......... 18·015 58 Viet. c. 72). . . 2·063, 8-165,
Young & Marten v. MacManus Childs [1969) 1 A.C. 454; [1968} 3 W.L.R. 630; 112 1835 Highway Act (5 & 6 Will. 4, 15·023
S.J. 744; [1968] 2 All E.R. 1169, H.L.. . . . . . . . . . 1·183, 4·066, 4·067, 4·071, 4·072, c. 50)- 1906 Merchant Shipping Act (6
4·075, 4-086, 4·092, 4·094, 4·097, 4·098, 4·107, 4·108, 4·109, 4·118, 4·119, s.46. . . . . . . . . . . 4·279 Edw. 7. c. 48)-
4-Ul, 4·123, 4·125, 4·191, 9·026, 13·002, 13·008, 13·029, 13-063 1838 Judgment Act (1 & 2 Viet. s.10. . . . . . . . . . . . ... 10-003
Yuen Kun Yeu v. A.-G. ofHongKong [1988] A.C.175; [1987] 3 W.L.R. 776; [1987] 2 c. 110) . . . . . 8·090 1911 Copyright Act (1 & 2 Geo. 5,
All E.R. 705; (1987) 131 S.J. 1185; (1987) 84 L.S. Gaz. 2049; (1987] F.L.R. 1854 Bills of Sale Act. . . ... 11·046 c. 46). . . . 2·273, 2-274, 2·275
291; (1987) 137 New L.J. 566; [(1988) 4 P.N. 65], P.C.. . . . . . . . 1-282, 1·288, 1·292 Common Law Procedure s.35(1). . . . 2·274
Yuill v. Yuill [1945] P.15.................... 18·165 Act (17 & 18 Viet. 1914 Bankruptcy Act (4 & 5 Geo.
c.125). . . . . . 14·064, 18-013, 5, c. 59). . . . . . 16·001, 16-005
18·026, 18·027 s.30 . . 16-016
Zalinoff v. Hammond [1898] 2 Ch. 92 18·122 s.5 . 18·013, 18·021
Zamperoni Decorators v. Lo Presti [1983] V.R. 338. s.31 , . 16-008, 16·014, 16·016
4·017 s.11 . . . . . . . . . . 18·015, 18-065 s.38 . . . . . . . . . 16·052
s.13 ................ 18·065 s.45 . . . . 16·005, 16·041, 16·044
s.17. . ............ 18·066 s.51 ................ 16-060
1855 Metropolitan Building Act s.54(4) .............. 14·006
(18 & 19 Viet. c. 122) . 4·279
(5). . . . . .. . 16·007
1856 Mercantile Law Amendment
s.105 ............... 16·009
Act (19 & 20 Viet.
(1) . . . . 16.010
c.97)-
s.323(5) ............. 14·006
s.3 . . . ........ 17·018
1920 Indemnity Act (10 & 11 Geo.
1863 Supreme Court of Judicature
Act (36 & 37 Viet. 5,c.48)-
c. 66)- s.2 8·216
s.23(6) .............. 14-016 1925 Law of Property Act (15 & 16
1873 Supreme Court of Judicature Geo. 5, c. 20). . . . . . . 16·002,
Act- 16-020, 18-025
s.25(6). . 14-012, 14·014, 14·044 s.53(l)(c)... . . . 14·012, 14·044
1875 Public Health Act (38 & 39 s.136. . . . . . . . 14·012, 14-016,
Viet. c. 55)- 14·039, 14·041, 14·044
s.174 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3·066 s.137(3) . . . . . . 14·021
1878 Bills of Sale Act (41 & 42 s.146 . . . . ..... 14·048
Vict.c.31) ... 11·026,11-046 Supreme Court of Judicature
s.4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11·047 (Consolidation) Act (15
1883 Bankruptcy Act (46 & 47 & 16 Geo. 5, c. 49)-
Viet. c. 52)- s.44. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·090
s.102(1) ............. 16·010 1926 South African Co's Act-
1889 Arbitration Act (52 & 53 ss.181, 182 ........... 16·054
Viet. c. 49). . . 11-046, 18·013 1927 Auctions (Bidding Agree-
s.l . . . . . . ... 18·015 ments) Act (17 & 18
s.4 . . . . . . . . · .. 18-068 Geo. 5, c. 12)-
s.19 . . ............ 18·021 s.1 . . . . . . . 3·081

cxvii
 cxviii TABLE OF STA TUTES TABLE OF STATU'IES cxix
1930 Arbitration (Foreign 1948 Companies Act (11 & 12 1950 Arbitration Act-cont. 1967 Misrepresentation Act-
Awards) Act ........ 18·013 Geo. 6, c. 38) ........ 16·001 (2) . . 18{!01, 18·003, 18·102 cont.
1931 Architects Registration Act s.32.... 2·043 (3). . 18·102 s.3 .. 1·133, 1·139, 1·171, 1·172,
(22 & 23 Geo. 5, c. 33)- s.95.... 11·047, 11·053, 11·055, s.25 ................ 18·070 1·176, 1·177, 1·178, 1·239,
s.5(2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·015 11·056, 11·058, 16-050 (2)(a) ............ 18·126 1·242,4·143
s.9 . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·013 s.302 . . . . 8·083 (b).. 18·002, 18·003, 1968 Trades Description Act (c.
s.17....... 2·011, 2·013, 2·015 s.317........ 16·014, 16·016 18·041, 18·126 29). . . . . . . . . . 2·012, 2·019
1933 Local Government Act (23 & s.323(4)............ 16·012 (4). . ... 18·102 s.19(1)(a). . . . . . . . . . . . 2·013
24 Geo. 5, c. 51)- 1950 Arbitration Act (14 Geo. 6, s.27. 6-046, 6·185, 18·048, 1969 Architects Registration
s.266 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·065 c. 27). . 6·066, 18·013, 18·016, 18·055, 18·056, 18·057 (Amendment) Act (c.
1934 Arbitration Act (24 & 25 s.32. . . 18·001, 18·025, 42). . . . . . . . . . 2·011, 2·015
18·017, 18·062, 18·075
Geo.5,c.14).. 6·066,6·175, 18·028, 18·033 Auctions (Bidding Agree-
18·013, 18·016, 18·073 18·084, 18.085, 18·162
Pt. I ............... 18·013 1956 Restrictive Trade Practises ments) Act (c. 56)-
s.5 . . . . . 6·073 Act (4 & 5 Eliz. 2, c. ss.1 & 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3·081
s.9 ...... 18·021 Pt. II . . . 18·003, 18·013
s.1. . . . . 18·002, 18·003, 18·014, 68) ...... 1·203,2·071,3·081 1970 Administration of Justice
s.14. 6·022, 18·070, 18·127 Copyright Act (c. 74). . . . . 2·273, Act (c. 31) ......... 18·013
Law Reform (Miscellaneous 18·015, 18·019, 18·025,
18·088, 18·113, 18·114, 2·274 s.44(1). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·090
Provisions) Act (24 & 25 s. 3(1). . . . . . . . . . 2·274, 2·275 1971 New South Wales Licensing
Geo. 5, c. 41). . . 8·089, 8·091, 18·115, 18·196
s.2(1) .............. 18·124 s.17.. 2·275 Act-
8·092 s. 19. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·281 s.45........... 1·268, 4·282
s.1(1) 4·270 (2) . . . . 18·124
s.3 . . . . . .. 18·124 s.48(1). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·275 1972 Defective Premises Act (c.
1935 Law Reform (Married 35)..... 1·277, 1·279, 1·314,
Women & Tortfeasors) (2) 18·124 1957 Occupier's Liability Act (5 &
6Eliz.2,c.31).... 1·239, 1·325, 1·358, 1·360, 1·361,
Act (25 & 26 Geo. 5, s.4. . . . . 18·014, 18·019, 18·025, 1·362, 1·363, 1·368, 1·369,
18·088, 18·089, 18·090, 18.091, 1·275, 1·310, l ·320, 1·325,
c.30) ........ 1·372,1·380, 2·083, 2· 152, 4·286, 6· 184,
18·113, 18·114, 18·123, 18·165 1·327, 1·328, 1·330, 1·331,
1·381, 1·382 1·332, 1·333, 1·334, 1·335, 14·002A
1936 Public Health Act (26 Geo. 5 (1). . . 18·015, 18·094, 18·110, s.1.... 1·321, 1·361, 1·366
& 1 Edw. 8, c. 49)- 1·336, 1·366,4·142, 15·052
18·120 (1). 1·361, 1·363
Pt. II. 2·148 (2) .............. 18·003 s.1(1) 1·329
(2) 1·329 (2) 1·363
s.61A .............. 2·148 s.6 ................ 18·072 (3) 1·363
s.64. 2·148 s.7. 18·065, 18·072 (3)(a) . . . . . . . . . 1-366
(b) . . . . 1·329 (4).. 1·361, 1·362
s.65. . . . . . . . . . . 2.148, 2.150 s.8(1) .............. 18·072 (5) . . . . . . 1·361, 1·363
1938 Architects Registration Act s.2(1) 1·329
(2) ..... 18·073 (2)..... 1·328, 1·329, 1·330 s.2.... 1·361, 1·363
(1 & 2 Geo. 6, c. 54)- (3) ... 18·072 (3)(6) . . . . . . . . . 1-330 s.3.. 1·361, 1·363
s.1 2·011 s.9(1). . . . 18·073, 18·074 (1) . . . . 1·362
(3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·011 (4)(b) ........ 1-335,2·022
s.10 ................ 18·075 s.3(1) 1·330 s.4........ 1·328, 1·363, 1·366
1939 Limitation Act (2 & 3 Geo. 6, (l)(a) ............ 18·076
c. 21) . . . 4·284 s.4 1·363 (1) 1·321
(2) . . . . . . . . 18·075, 18·076 (b) 1·333 1973 Supply of Goods (Implied
s.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·307 (3). . 18·075
s.26. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·128 s.5(1) 1·329 Terms) Act (c. 13). . . . 1·183,
s.12.. 18·016, 18·017, 18·136 1960 Corporate Bodies' Contracts 4·067
(b)......... 4·294 (1) ........ 18·158, 18·162
s.27(3) .............. 18·059 Act (8 & 9 Eliz. 2, c. 1975 Arbitration Act (c. 3). . . . 14·038,
London Government Act (2 (2) .............. 18·158 46. 1·088, 2·043 18·123, 18·196
& 3 Geo. 6, c. 40)-
(3) .............. 18·158 1961 Public Health Act (9 & 10 s.1 . . . . . 18·003, 18·080, 18·091
s.160(2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·065 (4). . . ... 18·158 Eliz.2,c.64) .... 2.148,2·151 (1) . . . 18·003, 18·082, 18·120
1943 Law Reform (Frustrated (5) .............. 18·158 1963 Companies Act- (4). . 18·003, 18·080
Contracts) Act (6 & 7 (6)(a) . . . . . . . . . . . 18·082A s.275 . . . . . ....... 13·125 s.3(2) . . . . .. 18·171
Geo.6,c.40) ... 1·264,1·265, (h) ........... 18·082 Limitation Act (c. 47). . . . . l ·347, s.4 ...... 18·003
1·271, 2·055, 4·239, 4·240, s.13(3)...... 18·126, 18·135 4·285 s.5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·120
4·241, 4·243, 4·249, 4·251, s.14.... 18·016, 18·017, 18·167 1967 Misrepresentation Act (c. s.7(1)... 18·001, 18·013, 18·171
4·255, 4·258, 4·264, 4·270, s.18 ................ 18·178 7)... 1·127, 1·129, 1·133, Limitation Act (c. 54).. 1·347
8·104 (1) .............. 18·178 1·136, 1·137, 1·139, 1·142, 1977 Unfair Contract Terms Act
s.l. . . . . . . . . . . . 4·244, 4·272 (4) .............. 18·191 1·149, 1·150, 1·154, 1·157, (c.50) ... 1·176,1·178,1·233,
s.1(2) . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-241 s.19(A) ............. 18·012 1·165, 1·174, 1·212, 1·275, 1·237, 1·238, 1·240, 1·242,
s.1(2). 4·242, 4·243, 4·258, 4·263 s.20 . 8·090, 8·092 l ·280, 3·077, 4·045, 4· 143, 1·243, 1·244, 1·245,2·170,
s.1(3). . 4·241, 4-242, 4·243, s.21 . . . . . . . . . . 18·004, 18·011 18·007 5·058, 6·003, 6·006, 6·090,
4·244, 4·263 s.22. . 18·138, 18·178, 18·191 s.l(a). . . . . 1·132, 1·144 6·106, 6-184, 8·222, 9·021,
s.1(5) . . . . . . . . . 4·244 s.23. . 18·002, 18·011 (b). 1·132, 1·138, 1·149 13·113, 18·194
s.2(3). . . . . . . . . . 4.244, 4·263 (1). 18·126, 18·135, s.2 4·278 s.1(3) 1·239
1945 Law Reform (Contributory 18·138, 18·147 (1). 1·132, 1·136, 1·140, s.2 ........ 1·178, 1·239, 1·241
Negligence) Act (8 & 9 (2)....... 18·126, 18·134 1·141, 1·143, 1·149, (2) . . 1·241
Geo.6,c.28) ... 1·372,1·377, s.24. . . 6·022, 6·099; 6·105, 1·150, 1·151, 1·164, s.3. 1·241,1·242
1·378, 8·224, 15·054 6-175, 6·226, 18.002~·1s.010 (2). 1·133, 1·139, 1·149, (1)..... . . . . . 1·239, 1·243
s.4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·377 (1). . ...... 18·127 1·150, 1·151 (2)(a) . . . . . . . . . 1·239
cxx TABLE OF STATUTES TABLE OF STATUTES cxxi
1977 Unfair Contract Terms 1979 Arbitration Act-cont. 1985 Companies Act (c. 6). . . . 16-001, 1986 Insolvency Act-cont.
Act-cont. (1) ...... 18·158 16·024 s.278 ............... 16·004
(b) 1·239 (2) . . . . 18· 158, 18·166 s.36. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·088 s.284 . . . . .... 16·005
s.4 1·240 s.6 ... 18·013 s.395... 11·005, 11·053, 16·050, (1) . . . . . . 16·005
,.6(3) J.239 s.22 . . . . . ..... 18· 163 16·051 (4). 16·005, 16·044
s.7 1·241 s.23. . ..... 18·163 (2) . . ..... 11·053 s.285(5) . . .. 16-005
(3) 1·239 SaleofGoodsAct(c.54) ... 1·183 s.396 ............... 16·051 s.310 . . . . . . . .. 16·060
s.8. . 1·133, 1·172, 1·239, 4·143 s.2(i). . . . . 4·067, 8·223, 8·226, (l)(b)... . . 16·051 (2) ............. 16·059
s.11...... 1·243 11·058 Administration of Justice (7) . . . . . . 16·060
(1).. 1·133, 1·139, 1·172, s.25.... 11·005, 11·010, 11·027, Act (c. 61) ......... 18·013 s.316 . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 16·011
1-174 11·054, 11 ·058, 16·050 1986 Latent Damage Act (c. (1). . . . . . . 16-011, 16·021
(4) 1·240 1980 Limitation Act (c. 58). . 1·347, 37). . 1·016, 1·279, 1·307, (2) ............. 16·011
s.12. 1·241 1·365, 1·366, 1·371, 4·285, 1·347, 1·349, 1·363, 1·366, s.322(3) ............. 16·017
(l)(a). 1·243 4·295 1·367, 1·369, 1·376, 2·084, s.323. 16·008, 16-014
(,). 1·241 s.2....... 1·307, 1·367,4·284 2·110, 2·222, 4·286, 4·287 (3) ............. 16·014
s.13(1)..... 1·240, 1·241, 1·242 s.S . . . . . . 4·284 s.1. . . . 1·365, 4·285, 4·287 s.328 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·083
1978 CivilLiability(Contribution) s.8. . . . . . . 4·284, 4·288 s.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·365 (2) ............. 16·044
Act(c.47) ..... 1·372,1·381, s.10. . . . . 1·382 s.3....... 1·365,1·367,4·287 (3) ............. 16-044
1·382, 8·224 ss.11-13. . . 1·366, 4·285 (l)(b) 1-367 s.339 ............... 16-005
s.1(3) . . . . . 1·381 ss.11-14. . . . . . 4·286 (6) . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·368 s.340 ............... 16·005
(4) 1·381 s.llA. . . . . . 1·371, 4·286 s.4(1)(a) 1-349 (3)(b) ........... 16·005
s.2(2). 1·383, 1·386 s.14.. . ..... 1·366 s.14A . . . 1·366 s.341 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16·005
,.6(1) 1·381 s.14A... 1·307, 1·365, 1·369, s.14B . . . . 1·366 s.354(2). . . . . . . 16·007, 16·030
,.7(3) 1·386 4·286 (1) . . . . . . . . . 1-368 s.363 ............... 16·009
1979 British Columbia Laws (6) . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·368 Insolvency Act (c. 45). 11·050, s.365(5) . . ... 16·011
Equity Act- (7) . . . 1·368 14·006, 16·001, 16·002, s.382 ............... 16·014
s.58. 1·271 (8) . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·368 16·010, 16·012, 16·014, Scbed. 1 ............ 16·020
Law and Equity Act- s.14B ...... 1·307, 1·365,4·286 16·017, 16·020, 16·023, Sched. 2 ............ 16·020
s. 58 . . . . . . . . . 7·070 s.28A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·365 16·041 Sched. 4. . . . . . . 16·005, 16-006
Arbitration Act (c. 42). . . 18·003, s.30(3)(a) ............ 18·028 Pt. JII . . . . ..... 16·020 Sched. 5 ............ 16·006
18·011, 18·013, 18-022, s.32. . . . . . . 1·369, 4·284, 4·296 Pt. IV .............. 16·002 para. 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . 16·032
18·044, 18·074, 18-075, (1). . 4·295 Pt. VIII . . ........ 16·002 1987 Consumer Protection Act (c.
18-076, 18·119, 18·120, (b) 4·296 ,.8(3) .............. 16·024 43)..... 1·369, 1·370, 1·371,
18· 170, 18·172 s.32(2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·296 ,.9(3) ...... 16·023 4.286
s.1. . . . . 18·004, 18·005, 18·010 s.33. . . . . . 1·366, 4·286 s.11(3) .............. 16026 s.1(2) 1·371
(1)-(4) ............ 18·173 s.34(2). . 18·003, 18·041 (c) . . . . . . . . . . . . 16·026 s.2(2) 1·370
(1) .............. 18·174 (3) .............. 18·043 s.15 . . ... 16·048 s.3 1·370
(2) . . 18·173, 18-175 (a) ............ 18·059 (2)(b) . . . . . ... 16·025 ,.4(2) 1·371
(3). 18·171, 18·172, 18·181, 1981 Supreme Court Act (9). . . . . .... 16·025 s.5(1) 1·370
18-198 (c. 54) ...... 18·013 s.29(2) .............. 16·020 (3) 1·371
(a) . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·005 s.35A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·091 s.44(1)(a) ............ 16·021 s.45(1).. . . . . 1·371
(b) ............ 18·177 s.37(1). . ..... 18·082 (b) ........... 16·021 1988 Local Government Act (c.
(d) ............ 18·004 s.43A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-064 s.87(1) .............. 16·032 9) . . . . . . . . . 3·082
(4)..... 18·174.18·177 s.148 . . 18·004 s.107. . . . . . 8·083, 16·044 s.17(4).. . . . 3·082
(5) .............. 18·170 1982 Supply of Goods and Ser- s.123 . . . . . . . . . . . 16·003 (5). . . . . . . 3·082
(6) .............. 18·170 vices Act (c. 29).. 1·183, (l)(e) ........... 16·003 (a). 3·082
(6A) ............. 18·004 4·067, 4·076 s.127 . . . . . . 16·006, 16·044 s.18. . . . . 3·082
(7) .............. 18·004 ,.4(6) . . . . . . . . . . 4·067 s.129(1) . . ....... 16·006 ,.19(7)(b) 3·082
s.2 . . . . . 18·004, 18.005, 18·010, (9). . . . . . . 4·067, 4-127 (2). . . . 16-006, 16·044 ,.20(2)(b)(i). 3·082
18·119, 18·159, 18·163, Administration of Justice s.130 . . . . ...... 16·005 Consumer Arbitration
18·168, 18·177 Act (c. 53) . . . . . . . . . 8·091 s.145 . . . ....... 16-005 Agreements Act (c.
(1) .... 18·172 s.19A 8·092 s.178 . . . . .... 16·012 21) .............. 18·195
(a) .......... 18·168 1984 Occupier's Liability Act (c. (5). 16·011, 16·012, 16·021 Copyright, Design and Pat-
(2) .............. 18·177 3)...... 1·275, 1·279, 1·325, (6) . . ....... 16·011 ent Act (c. 48). . . . . . 2·273,
(2A) ............. 18·004 1·327, 1·328,4·142 s.186. . . 14·011, 16·007, 2·274, 2·275, 2·282
(3) . . . . ....... 18-004 s.1(3)(a) . . . . . . . . . 1·328 16·022, 16-030 s.4(1)(a) . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·275
s.3. . . . 18·005, 18·011, 18·022, (4) 1·328 ,.234(3), (4). . 16·024, 16·048 (2). . . . . . . . . . 2·274, 2·275
18·058, 18·060, 18·080, County Courts Act (c. 28)- s.238 . . ...... 16·006 s.9(1) 2·274
18·081, 18·104, 18·167 s.69. 8·091 s.239 . . . . . . . . .. 16·006 s.77(4) .............. 2·282
(3) 18·104 Building Act (c. 55)- s.240 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16·006 (5). 2·282
(6) ....... 18·195 s.16.... , 2·148 s.245 . . .... 16-023 s.78. 2·282
s.5..... 18·016, 18·017, 18·136, s. 35 . . . . . . 2·148 s.267 . . . . . . 16·003 (2)(b) 2·282
18·197 s.38. . . . . 2·152 s.268 . . ..... 16-003 (4)(b) 2·282
cxxii TABLE OF STATUTES

1988 Copyright, Design and Pat- 1986 South Australian Commer-

ent Act-cont. cial Arbitration Act-
s.80. 2·276, 2·282 s.4 . 18·159A
s.12(i). 18·159B
(4)(,). . .
s.96(2). . . . . . . .
2·282
2·275 s.14 .............. 18·159A TABLE OF STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS
s.101 2·281 s.22...... 18·159A
1989 Companies Act (c. 40)- s.43.... 18·159A
s.47. 18·159A, 18·159D (References are to Paragraph numbers)
s.93. . . 11·053, 16'051
1990 Australian Commercial
s.95 ................ 11·057 Arbitration (Amend-
1990 Contracts (Applicable Law) 1986 Insolvency Rules (S.I. 1986 1986 Insolvency Rules-cont.
ment) Act.... 18·022, 18.174 r. 4.90(3) . . . . . .. 16·014
Act (c. 36) ......... 18·087 No. 1925) (Liquid-
r. 13·12 ............. 16·014
Courts and Legal Services CANADA ation)- (3) .......... 16017
Act (c. 41)- Pt. III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l 6·020
Ontario Factory Act. . . . . . 4·168 (4) . . . . . . . . . . . 16·017
s.100 .......... 6'064, 18·198 L 4.86(1) ...... 16-017
1987 Province's Law and Equity
Act (British Colum- r. 4·90. . 16·008, 16·014
bia)-
AUSTRALIA s.58. 4·220

1899 Australian Bills of Sale SINGAPORE

Act- 1985 Singapore Companies
s.5.... 11·029, 11·046, 11·047 Act. . . . . . . . 13·126, 16·054
1984 Australian Commercial s.280(1).... . ...... 13·126
Arbitration Act ...... 18·056 s.327(2) . . .. 13·126
s.18(3) .............. 18·166
s.20. . . ... 18·144 INDIA
ss.31, 32 . . . . . . . . . 8·097 1872 Indian Contracts Act .. 4·240,
s.38.. . . 18·173 4·243
(5) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·174 s.56 .... . 4.239
s.47. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8'211 s.64 .... . 1·265
s.48(1). . . . . . . . 18·056 s.65. 1·265, 4·239

cxxiii
 RULESOFTHESUPREMECOURT
(References are to Paragraph numbers)

Ord.14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·121, 18·122 Ord.58-

Ord. 29. . . . . 18·092, 18·167 r. 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·096
Ord. 50--- Ord. 73-
r. 8.... . .............. 2·270 r. 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·079
Ord. XI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·079

cxxv
 TABLE OF REFERENCES TO RIBA
CONTRACT FORM CONDITIONS
(References are to Paragraph numbers)

cl. 1...... 7·037, 7·113 cl. ll(d) .......... 16-018

(1). 1·219,1·230,2·170,4-126, (1). 7·057, 7·062, 7·087
5·058, 6-003, 6· 184 (2). 4·036, 7·043
1.3. . 1·230 (3). 4·179, 13·065
1.4. 2·242 (4) ...... 7·062
1.7. 2·042 (b). 7·105, 7·111, 8·038, 8·044
1.12. 2·123 (6) ... 1·258, 7·049, 7·052, 7·113,
1.13. 2·123 8·038, 8·044, 8·069, 8·070,
1.18 . 2·024 8·095, 8·206, 8·213, 8·215,
1.21.. 2·184,2·244 8·229, 13·068, 13·071
1.22.. 2-184,2·244 cl. 12........ 1·117, 1·227, 1·228, 2·032,
1.23 . . . . . . 2·184 3·051, 7·061
1.24 . . . . . . . . 2·123 (1) .. 1·226, 2·161, 4·036, 7·019,
1.60 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·194 8·037, 8·038
cl.2 ......... 2·130,3-051, 7·071,8·031 (2) .. 2·161, 7·012, 7·015,8·027,8·047
(,) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·255 cl. 13. . . . . . . 1·117, 2·229, 7·007, 8·049
(1)....... 4·144 13.1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7·043
2.1. . . 1·219, 2·170, 4·039, 5·058, 6·184 13.1.1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·036
2.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·161,4-039 13.1.2.1 .................. 10·066
2.2.1. . . . . . . . . . . . 1·226, 3·051 13.2 . . . . . . 7·062
2.2.2.1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·031 13.4.1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7·062
2.2.2.2. . . 7-015, 8·038, 8·047 13.5.1.1...... 7·113
(3) .................... 7·061 13.5.1.2 .................. 8·038
2.5.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3·032 13.5.1.3............. 7·105, 7·111
2.13.5.3.1 . . 8·031 13.5.2. . . . . 8·038
cl.3.. . ... 2·147,4·281 13.5.3.3..... 7·106, 7·113,8·038
3.2.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3·035 13.5.5. . . . 7·113, 8·038
(3). . 2·200, 2·201, 4-036, 4·179, 5·038 13.5.6......... 7·113,8·038,8·044
(4) ....... 2·130,4·095,4·177,4-179 cl.14 . . . . .. 11·045
3.6. . ........ 2-242 (b).. 15·018, 15·024, 15·051, 15·059
3.8.............. 2·243, 2·244 (1) .......... 4·036, 7·019, 11·057
3.9.................. 2·244 14.2 . 8·049
cl.4 ............. 2·130,4·115,4·275 14.4.1 . 8·051
4.2 ..................... 7·061 14.5 . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·051
4.23A. . . . . . . . . . . 2·240 14.5.1.2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·051
cl.5..... . .. 2·169,5·034 14.5.1.3. . . . . . . . . . . 8·051
5.3.2. . . . 4·036 cl. 15. . . . . . . . . . . . 4·029, 5·034, 5·039,
5.4.......... 4·177 8· 158, 15·018
cl. 6(3) .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 5·034 (2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·169
(4)... 4·095,5·033 (3) ................... 2·169
cl. 7 . . . 4·149 cl.16. 4·149, 10·060
cl. 8.3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5·034 cl. 17. . . . . 1·219, 5·039, 14·006
(4) . . . . . . . . . . . 7·007 (1). . . . . . . . . . . . . 14·055, 14·057
8.4. . . . . . . . 5·033 (2) ................... 14·055
cl. 9... 6·215, 7·062 17.2 ................... .
(iii). . . . . . . . . . . 5·016 cl. 18. 10·060, 15·019, 15·026
cl. 10. . . . 1·117, 2·024, 2·027, 3·051, 7·061 cl. 19. 1·219, 14·068, 15·027
(ii) 6·077 (2)(a). 2-173, 15·025
(iii)................... 5·016 cl. 20. . 7·031, 13·054, 15·026
cl. 11. . . . . . 2·214, 7·007, 8·027, 8·028 (c). . . . . . . . 15·014, 15·019, 15·022

cxxvii
 cxxviii RIBA CONTRACT FORM CONDITIONS
RIBA CONTRACT FORM CONDITIONS cxxix
cl. 20A ............... 4·059, 15·014 cl. 26.2.7. . . . . . 5·035, 7·049, 7·113, 8·038
20C............... . . . . . 1·326 cl. 36 ...... .. ....... 4·195 cl. 40 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·057
26.6 ................ 8·069, 8·070 cl. 38 ... .
20.2..... . ...... 2·173 cl. 27. . . . . 8·052 Art. 3. 6·173, 6·174
. . . 4· 179, 13·065, 13·072, (5) . .............. 13·028
cl. 21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·079, 15·027 5.2....... 6·209, 18·043
16·018, 18·057 cl. 39.3 .. . . . . . . . . . 8·055, 8·056 5.3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18·005, 18·057
(,) . . . . . . . 13-124 (a) .. ;:.·.·.. 4·185,4·190,4·194,
(1) ................... 4·128 13·012, 13·072
(2). . . 7·049, 13·077, 13·080, 15·025 (a)(i)-(ix) .......... 13·046
(3)(a) ................. 13-102 (a)(i) ......... 4·190
cl. 22. . . . . . . . . . . . 2·214, 4·079, 6·075, cl. 27(a)(ii). . . . . . . . . . . 13·075, 13·082
6·170, 10·048, 10·067, (vi)........... 10·098, 13·026
10.071, 18·092 (b) ................... 10·098
22A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15·014 (,) ................... 13·128
cl. 23. . . . . . . . 1·335, 2·214, 4·195, 6·088, (d) . . . . . . . . . ... 13·096
7·033, 13·071, 13·074, 13·077 (ii) . . . 13·079
(f). . . . . . . . 10·025, 13-071, 13-074 27.2. . . . . . . . . 12·032, 16·022, 16·047
(g). . . . . . . 2·171, 4·269, 10·098, 27.4.1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12·061
10·099, 10·100, 13·026,
cl. 28.. 4·119, 13·033, 13·124
13·071, 13·074 (b) . . . . . . . . 4·185
(h) ... 10·025 28.1.1 . . . . . . .. 12·055
(j) .. . . . . . 2·027, 10·100 28.1.3.... 1·242
23.2. . . . . . . 5·036, 7·033, 7·049
23.4 ... . 28.1.3.1. . . . . . . . . . 4·264
6·198
cl. 24 ..... . 28.1.3.4. . . . . . . . . . 5·036
1·258, 2·214, 4·095, 4·195,
28.3.1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·269
7·049, 7·052, 7·114, 8·069,
cl. 29. . . . . . . 4·144, 7·046, 13·023
8·070, 8·096, 8·213, 8·215,
cl. 30(1). . . . . 6·042, 6-192
10·071, 13·068, 13·071,
30.1.1.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . 2·170, 6-184
13·077, 14·066
(f). . . 6·003, 6·074, 6·084, 6·085 (2). . . . . 4·023, 5·026, 11-030
(1) ...... 1·258,2·229,8·095,8·206 (a) ................. 11·014
(a)....... 4·177,5·035, 7·114 30.2.1 . . . . . . . . . . . 5·026
(b) . . . . . . . . . 5·035 30.3 . . . . . . 6·206
(,) 7·012 (4). . . . 8·081,8·084, 14·045, 16·031
(,) . . . . . . . 5·035 (a) ......... 16·018
24.1 . . . . ............ 10·023 (,) . . . . . . 4·030
(2). . . . 4·177, 8·069, 8·070, 8·111 (5)(6)................. 6215
24.2 . . . . . .............. 10·023 (c). . . . . . 10·098, 13·026, 13·072
24.2.1. 10·023, 10·071, 10·095 30.5 .. 16·031
cl. 25 .......... 4·305, 10·046A, 12·090 30.5.1 . . . . . ... 14·045
25A. . . . . . . . . . 3·048, 3·049, 3·052 30.5.3. 8·084, 8·085, 8·086
(1). . . . . . . 6·123, 12·036 (6) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6·215
(2). 12·032, 16·016, 16·022, 16-047 30.6.1.1. . . . . . . . . . . 6·215
(3)(6) . . . 13·129 (7). 6·003, 6·017, 6·046, 6·076,
(d). 4·028, 10·047, 12·075, 6·084, 6·085, 6-092, 7·052,
17·012A 8·112, 10·059, 10·071, 18·002
25.3. . . 10·046, 10·093, 17·012A (a)... 2·170,6·003,6·184
25.3.1. . . . . . 10·046A, 10·090 (i). . . . . . . . . 1·219, 5·058
25.3.1.2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10·046A (b) . . 2·191
25.3.3 . . . 10·046A 30.7.. . ........... 4·135
25.3.3.1. . . . . . ..... 10·046A (8).............. 6·189,6215
25.4 . . . . . . . ......... 10·065 30.9 . . . 18·057
25.4.7. . . . . . . . . . . . . 10·098, 13·057 30.9.1. . . 6·003, 18·057
25.4.10. . ....... 10·100 30.9.1.1. . . 1·219, 5·058
25.4.12. 1·219,2·172,10·065 30.9.1.2. . . 4· 135, 7·052
cl. 26. 4·264, 7·052, 8·069, 8·070, 30.9.3. 18·057, 18·059
8·096, 8·213, 8·215, 12·040 30.11 . . . . . . 6·189
(l)(a)..... 12-055, 12·058 cl. 31A . . . . . . . . . . 8·053
(,) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1·242 (c). . . . . 8·055, 8·056
(i) 4·269 310.(3) 2·062
(d) ................. 16·029 (2) .... 13-028
(2)(b)(vi) 8·216 (3) .... 13·028
26.2.1 .......... 4·177,5·035, 7·114 cl. 34 . . 2·214
26.2.2 . . . . . . . . . . 5·035 cl. 35 . . . . . . . . 4·195
26.2.5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5·035 (2) 6·209
TABLEOFREFERENCESTOICECONTRACT
FORM CONDITIONS
(References are to Paragraph numbers)

cl. l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·191 cl. 44(4). . 10·071, 10·093

cl. 2. . . . . . . . . 2·022, 2·023, 8-055, 8-056 cl. 46 . 7·050
(3), proviso(b)............ 7·062 cl. 47 .................... 10·091A
cl. 3............ 1·219, 14·006, 14·055 (4) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10·071
cl. 4 . . . . . .. 14·055 cl. 48 . . . . 4·029
(4). .. .. . 7·052, 7·053 (1). . . . . . . 5·030, 5·048
cl.5.......... 1·228,1·230,8-191 cl. 49(2). . 5·039, 5·041, 5·049
cl. 6 . . . . . . . . . ..... 7·012 (3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7·054
cl. 7(1) . . . 2·130 (4) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-054
cl. 8. . . . . . 2·130, 4·177, 8·067 (5) . . . . . . 7·054
(2) . . . 4-104 · cl. 50 . . 7·054
cl. 9. . 1·058, 1·209, 7-006 cl. 51 . . . . . . 4·173
cl. 10 ...... ·. . . . 3-065 (1). . 7-007, 7·008, 7·043, 7·087
d.1!(4)(d) ................. 7·113 (2). 7·055, 7·057, 7·062
cl. 12. . . . . . . . 1·160, 2·128, 4·043, 4·050, cl. 52. . . . . . . 4·134, 7·022, 8·003, 8·031
4· 134, 8·062, 8·065, 8·066, 8·067 (1). 7·105, 7·111, 7·113
(1). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·029, 8·067 (2). 4·134, 7·049, 7·052, 7·053,
(2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·064, 8·065 7·054, 7·105, 7·113, 7·116
(3). . . . . 8·064, 8·065, 8·067 (4). . . . . . 4·134, 7·052, 7·053, 8·064,
cl. 13. . . . 4·043, 4·126, 4·264, 7·030, 8·068 8·085
(1). 7·008, 7·039, 7·057, 7·113, (e). . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·134, 8·085
8·068 (6) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·134
(3). 1·219, 1·230,2·177, 7·008, cl. 54 .......... ·........... 11·014
7·113, 7·116, 8-068 cl. 55. . . . . . . 2·032, 4·039, 7·022, 8·003,
cl. 14 ............. 2·017, 7·032, 7-037 8·039, 8·040
(2) .. .. .. ........ 9·042 (1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7·049
(3)-(6). . . . 2-177, 9·042 (2). 1·219, 2·161, 2·177, 7·012,
(7) . . 9·042 7·019, 7·034, 8·047, 8·068
cl. 20 . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 4·050 cl. 56. 2·032, 4·039, 8·027, 8·039,
(1) . . . . . . . 4·059 8·040, 8·045, 8·049
(2) .. .. .. . 4·043 (2). 1·219, 2·161, 2·177, 7·015,
cl. 22 ..................... 15·026 7·019, 8·007, 8·011, 8·014,
(l)(a) ................. 15·026 8·031, 8·042, 8·045, 8·068
cl. 23 ..................... 15·014 cl. 57. . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·027, 8·029, 8·031
(1) . . . . . . . . . . . . 15·027 cl. 58. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4· 195, 13·091
cl. 24 .... 15·026 (1) . . . . 13-092
cl. 26. . 4·115, 4·275 cl.59.... 4·060,4·119,4·195
cl. 31. . 4·144, 13·024 cl.59A................. 2·177
cl. 33 . . .......... 11·020 (6) . . ........ 13-028
cl. 36 . . 4· 126 cl. 59B. . . . . . 2·177, 13·028
cl. 37 . . 4·149 cl. 59(c) . . . . ..... 13·128
cl. 38(2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5·034 (1) ... 13-012
cl. 39(1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5·033 (a) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·185
(2) . . . . . . 4-144 (2) . . . . . . . ..... 13-128
cl.40 ................. 4·264, 7·049 cl. 60(2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·030
(1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·134 (4) . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . 6·171
cl. 41 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4·128 (5)(c) . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . 4·030
cl. 42(1) ................... 10·065 (6).......... 1-219, 8·098, 8·099
cl. 44. . . . . 10·024, 10·025, 10·036, 10·040 (7).. .. . .. .. 5·026, 13-028
(3) . .. . . . . . . . . . . 10·071 cl. 61. . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-003, 6-054, 6· 183

cxxxi
 l..

cxxxii IcE CONTRAcr FORM· CONDITIONS

d. 61(2). 2·078, 5·058, 6·003, 6· 184 cl. 65(2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8·049
cl. 62 ... 6-054, 6· 183 cl. 66. 1·231, 2-217, 2·220, 4·134,
cl. 63. 1·220, 6·054, 12·008, 12-061 6-009, 6·181, 6·209, 18·045,
(1) 16·047 18-047, 18·053, 18-055, 18-063
(c) 12·094 (1) ..... 18-053 CHAPTER 1
(4) .... 4·028 cl. 67. 1·231, 6·009
cl. 64 2·264 Bond ... 3·065, 17-010
cl. 65 2·264 Tender. 3·053
GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF LAW

PARA.
Definitions and Background 1·001
Section 1. Classification of Contracts...... . 1·014
Section 2. Formation of a Simple Contract
(1) Elements of a Simple Contract.. .. . 1·017
(2) Offer................................................ . 1·018
(3) Withdrawal of an Offer and Counter-offer.......................... . 1-023
(4) Death of Offeror or Offeree 1·030
(5) Acceptance ............................... . 1-032
(6) Agreements to Agree and Vagueness........................... . 1·042
,. (7) Agreements "Subject to Contract" ................................ .
(8) Consideration
1·057

(a) Generally................................. .. 1-061

(b) Accord and satisfaction .............. . 1-071
(c) Forbearance to sue ...................... . 1-079
(d) Collateral agreements with third parties.......... . 1·080
(9) Intention to Create Legal Relations................. . 1·081
Section 3. Contracts Under Seal
{l) Generally............................ . 1·085
(2) Contracts with Local Authorities ............. . 1-088
Section 4. Variation of Contracts......................... . 1·089
Section 5. Void and Voidable Contracts
(1) Generally ..... 1·092
(2) Mistake
(a) Offact.. ................... . 1·094
(b) Common mistake .... . 1·096
(c) Unilateral mistake........................... 1·097
(d) Parties mistaking each other. .... . 1·099
(e) Non est factum ......................................................... . 1·100
(3) Rectification.............................. .. 1·109
(4) Misrepresentation
(a) Generally ....................... . 1·127
(b) Misrepresentation defined ......................... . 1·128
(c) Summaryofpre-1967law....................... . 1·131
(d) Summary of the Misrepresentation Act 1967 .......... . 1·132
(e) The Hedley Byrne liability....... .. 1·134
(f) The law as modified by the Act of 1967............... . 1·140
(g) Fraudulent misrepresentation..................... . 1·162
(h) Exclusion of liability for misrepresentation.................. . 1-165
(i) Exclusions and effect of the Misrepresentation
Act1967,s.3 ..................... . 1·172
Section 6. Implied Terms
(1) General Principles..........._.................................................. 1· 179
(2) Application to Building and Engineering Contracts.. 1·186
(3) Implied Covenant for Good Faith and Fair Dealing 1·197
Section 7. Custom and Trade Usage
(1) Generally................................. 1·200
(2) Incorporation of Usage 1·202
(3) Admissibility of Evidence of Trade Usage..... 1·204
Section 8. Collateral Agreements. l ·208

1
2 GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF LAW [CHAP. I DEFINITIONS AND BACKGROUND 3
Section 9. Interpretation
(iv) Effect of Murphy v. BrentwOod District Council.. 1·357
(1) General Rules........ . 1·215 (7) Defective Premises Act 1972............................. 1·361
(2) More Specific Rules
(8) Latent Damage Act 1986 1·364
(a) Subsequent conduct 1·222 (9) Consumer Protection Act 1987 1·370
(b) Deletions. 1·223 (10) Concurrent Liability in Contract and Tort
(c) Contra preferentem rule .. 1·224 (a) Generally........................................... 1·372
( d) Priority of documents
(b) Contributory negligence.................... 1·377
(i) General rule .................................. . 1·225
(ii) Express provisions for priority......... . (c) Contribution between defendants 1.379
1·226 (i) A/E's supervision l ·383
(3) Discrepancy and Divergence Provisions 1·229
(4) Exemption Clauses (ii) The "contract setting" or "contract structure"...... ·1·386
1·231
(5) Indemnity Clauses...... (11) Vicarious Liability and Independent Contractors... 1·387
1·234
(6) Other Clauses .................... . Section 13. Economic Duress 1·390
1·236
(7) The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 ..... . 1·238
Section 10. Estoppel and Waiver
(I) Estoppel.. ........... . 1·246 DEFINITIONS AND BACKGROUND
(2) Estoppel Per Rem Judicatam ... 1·250
(3) Waiver and Equitable Estoppel... 1·255
Section 11. Quasi-contractual Liability
(1) Quasi-contract Generally............... . A building or engineering contract may be defined, for the purposes of this 1·001
1.260
(2) Money Had and Received........... . 1·261 book, as an agreement under which a person, in this book called variously
(3) Quantum Meruit.......... . 1·263 the builder or contractor, undertakes for reward to carry out for another
Section 12. Liability in Tort
(1) Generally ........................................ .. 1·273
person, variously referred to as the building owner or employer, works of
(2) The Principle in Hedley Byrne v. Heller a building or civil engineering character. In the typical case, the work will
(a) Generally..... 1·280
(b) Application in construction projects...... .
be carried out upon the land of the employer or building owner, though in
1·290
(c) Owner/sub-contractor situations............. . 1·291 some special cases obligations to build may arise by contract where this is
(d) Contractor/A/E situations......................... . 1·293 not so, for example, under building leases, and contracts for the sale of
(i) Design............. .. ................................. . 1·295
Q!) Sup~rvisi?n and temporary works.......... . 1·297
land with a house in the course of erection upon it. 1
(111) Certification .............................................................. . 1·302 However, despite its title, this book is not concerned merely with build-
(iv) Liability of A/Es to contractors in United States ing and civil engineering projects and their associated sub-contracts and
law............. .................... . 1·305
(v) Liability of A/Es to contractors in Canada ..... . 1·306A
industries. It also deals with other projects or industries where an on-site
( e) Limitation ..................... . 1·307 construction element is involved, such as industrial plant contracts in the
(3) Liability Under the Principle of Donoghue v. Stevenson
(a) Generally ........ .
mechanical engineering industry, where on-site construction or erection is
1.308
(b) Application to construction contracts ........... . 1·310 usually involved, though it may be relatively small in value, but where in
(c) Proximity and economic loss limits ...................... . 1·322 general the same principles will apply. The fundamental characteristic
(d) Disclai~e~ and "c<;intract structure" or "contract
setting exemptions .......................... . 1·325
which governs these principles and which distinguishes construction con-
(4) The Occupiers' Liability Acts·1957 and 1984 tracts from the other major commercial contracts, such as contracts of sale
(a) Generally 1·328 or for services, is that as the work proceeds and becomes fixed or attached
(b) Application to Construction Contracts
(i) As between owner and contractor. .............. . 1·330
to the land of the owner it progressively and irretrievably becomes the
(ii) As between the main contractor and sub-con- property of the owner, whatever the financial rights or obligations of the
tractor.... ............................ . l ·331 parties may be at the time. Even here there may be some exceptions where
(iii) As between non-contracting parties..... . 1·332
(5) Strict Liability...................... . 1·337 contracts in the form of traditional construction contracts are used with-
(a) Rylands v. Fletcher........... . 1·338 out this factor being present, such as, for example, contracts for the con-
(b) Nuisance 1·339
(c) Trespass ..... 1·340
struction and load-out of off-shore oil installations, which share some of
( d) Withdrawal of support. 1·343 the characteristics of ship-building contracts and some of construction
(6) Liability Under the Anns Principle contracts.
(a) Generally ............... . 1·345
(b) The limitation problem.............. . 1·347
So far as the contract parties themselves are concerned, the traditional 1-002
(c) Application of the Anns principle nomenclature can also be confusing. Persons commissioning construction
(i) To whom duty owed 1·350
(ii) Applications of principle
work can be and are variously described in the contracts as owners, clients,
1·351
(iii) Principle not applicable.. .. ............... . 1·352 employers (particularly in civil engineering contracts but also in the
(d) The Heyman and D. & F. Estates and Murphy cases United Kingdom building standard forms) or purchasers (in industrial
(i) Heyman'scase .............. . ,1·.353
(ii) The D. & F. Estates case ....... . T·354
(iii) Combined effect of the two cases 1·356 I See post, Chap. 4, paras. 4·105 et seq.
 4 GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF LAW (CHAP. 1 DEFINITIONS AND BACKGROUND 5

plant or off-shore contracts, for example). On the other hand, contractors return to the historically older and more primitive arrangement, whereby
are usually so described in most construction contracts (with the adjectival the contractor not only carries out but also designs the work (recently
"main" (United Kingdom) or "prime" (United States) in Sub-contract known as "package deal", but more lately as "design and build" in the
contexts), though occasionally they may be described as vendors or sellers United Kingdom, and internationally as "turnkey") mean that drafting
in some plant erection contracts. In certain contexts, such as with sub- requirements applicable to the traditional contract will need radical alter-
contracts or their own labour, they are strictly employers, of course. To ation at almost all points.
reduce confusion the present edition will use the simple word "owner" No text book on construction contracts can avoid reference to standard 1·005
rather than the sometimes confusing "employer", and the words "con- forms of contract, and in particular no text book emanating from the
tractor" and "sub-contractor" in most general contexts, unless there is United Kingdom can avoid referring frequently to the United Kingdom
specific reason to refer to the terms actually used in a particular contract. standard forms of contract, and in particular to "the farrago of obscurities
1·003 So far as professional advisers are concerned, while the architect and which go to make up the RIBA contract". 3 These standard forms have for
(unique to the United Kingdom) the "quantity surveyor" ("QS") present nearly a century exercised great influence on the form and content of the
little difficulty, the expressions "engineer", "consulting engineer" or contracts in use not only in Commonwealth countries, such as Canada,
"consultant" can be indifferently used in the civil engineering field. In this Australia and New Zealand, but even more directly at the present day in
edition, the individual in administrative and technical charge on behalf of the new Commonwealth countries such as Malaysia, Hong Kong and Sin-
the owner of a civil engineering project using traditional contracting gapore, as well as in the principal international form of contract
arrangements will be described as the "engineer", and of a building pro- ("FIDIC") used frequently in developing countries. Indeed, prior to the
ject as the "architect" (regardless of their precise professional qualifi- Second World War it is clear from the law reports of the United States that
cations). In general discussion where identical principles apply to both very similar forms were up to that time in use there as well.
industries (as they almost invariably will) the descriptions "A/E" ( or "cer- It is of fundamental importance to appreciate the extremely limited 1·006
tifier" in s