Source: https://fr.b-ok.org/book/1269166/5a612f
Timestamp: 2020-02-17 22:47:57
Document Index: 684885308

Matched Legal Cases: ['UKHL ', 'UKHL ', 'art, 1', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'UKHL ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'UKHL ', 'EWCA ', 'UKHL ', 'UKHL ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ', 'EWCA ']

﻿ A New Land Law | Peter Sparkes | download
Principal A New Land Law
Peter Sparkes' path-breaking text on land law has been rewritten almost sentence by sentence - partly to incorporate the seismic changes introduced by the UK Land Registration Act 2002, along with commonholds, the explosion of human rights jurisprudence, and the unremitting advance of judicial exposition, and partly to accommodate the author's developing thinking on the structural aspects of the subject, jolted by the new clearer structure for land registration with its much greater clarity of function behind the means of protecting third party interests.
Pages: 852 / 983
ISBN 10: 1841133809
ISBN 13: 9781847314475
Peter Sparkes’ path-breaking text on land law has been rewritten almost sentence by
sentence partly to incorporate the seismic changes introduced by the Land
Registration Act 2002, along with commonholds, the explosion of human rights
jurisprudence, and the unremitting advance of judicial exposition. Partly also, to
accommodate the author’s developing thinking on the structural aspects of the
subject, jolted by the new clearer structure for land registration with its much greater
clarity of function behind the means of protecting third party interests.
The book opens with a series of shorter chapters each exploring a fundamental
building block—registration, houses, flats and commonholds, land, ownership and its
transactional powers, social controls balanced by human rights to property, fragmentation by time (the doctrine of estates), divisions of ownership and proprietary rights.
In terms of substantive chapters the book opens with discussion of the new transfer
system—paper-based transfer alongside the evolution towards electronic conveyancing—and the consequent changes to the proof of registered titles and to the registration curtain. The new approach to adverse possession against registered titles has
called for extended discussion, as has the authoritative elucidation of the concept of
adverse possession in Pye, enlightenment provided, as is so typical of our judicial
system, just as the concept itself has become practically redundant. In terms of proprietary interests the fundamentals are seen as rights to transfer, beneficial interests
under trusts which are overreachable, burdens which are endurable, leases, money
charges such as mortgages which are redeemable, and the obligations enforceable
within the neighbour principle—easements covenants and positive covenants being
treated as a semi-coherent whole. An attempt has been made to assist students by
moving some of the more arcane learning later into the book or into separate chapters
where these matters might be more readily ignored by a candidate concerned primarily to prepare for an examination.
The premise of the first edition was that changes to the land registration scheme
made in 1997 and the steady march towards a universal register meant that it was
opportune to abandon the unregistered/registered dichotomy in favour of a division
between registered and registrable land, and that this in turn required an integrated
treatment highlighting how the registered system was intended to dovetail with the
unregistered. So this edition continues to see one set of principles with two mechanistic implementations, an approach which has on balance, adverse possession apart,
been vindicated by the Land Registration Act 2002.
“A massive amount of research and scholarship has gone into the book, with impressive citation of cases, articles and case-notes, and of other textbooks . . . This
newcomer on the scene is a considerable addition to the ranks of serious textbooks on
land law and the author is to be congratulated.”
“The scope of this work is ambitious . . . it is a bold attempt to take the study of land
law forward . . . much more than a basic land law textbook . . . it would be a pleasure
to be able to teach a course requiring students to cover the substance or the bulk of it
whether in one or more modules . . . a difficult blend of background and history, massive referencing, discussion of statute and case law, all wrapped up in a text that is not
too difficult to absorb.”
“A most interesting and ground-breaking book.”
“At last, a brilliant law book! I think the approach is marvellous and will strongly recommend it to my students.”
Keith Gompertz, University of Central England
“. . . takes a more modern approach to the area . . . I am very impressed with the style,
layout and format. It will be a good teaching tool and I am looking forward to using
Alison Dunn, Newcastle Law School
“. . . not battling in the way land law texts tend to be . . .”
Helen Taylor, University of Teesside
Professor Edward Burn, City University
PETER SPARKES, LLB,
© Peter Sparkes 1999, 2003
The Author has asserted his right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act
1988, to be identified as the author of this work
ISBN 1–84113–380–9 (paperback)
Books Frequently Referred to
Law Commission Papers
Draft Land Registration Rules
TOWARDS A UNIVERSAL REGISTER
REGISTRATION OF ESTATES
SOURCES OF SUBSTANTIVE LAND LAW
DOVETAILING OF SUBSTANTIVE LAWS
THE LAND-NOT-LAND BORDERLINE
DIVISION BY TIME IN EQUITY
IDENTIFICATION OF THE ESTATE
TRANSFER OF THE FREEHOLD ESTATE
RENTCHARGE CONVEYANCING
UNDOCUMENTED SHIFTING OF LEGAL ESTATES
REGISTRATION OF THE CROWN ESTATE
ESCHEAT TO THE CROWN
FRAGMENTATION AND ABSOLUTE OWNERSHIP
COMPONENTS OF “ABSOLUTE” OWNERSHIP
COMMONHOLD UNITS
COMMONHOLD CREATION, VARIATION AND TERMINATION
SOCIAL INTEREST IN LAND
EXPROPRIATION (COMPULSORY PURCHASE)
VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL HUMAN RIGHTS
RESPECT FOR THE HOME AND FAMILY LIFE
FUNDAMENTAL TRIAL RIGHTS
BURDENS ON REGISTERED AND UNREGISTERED LAND
DIVISION BY BURDENS
A TAXONOMY OF BURDENS
LEGAL FORMALITY OF A DEED
DEEDS MADE ON “PAPER”
DOCUMENTS EXECUTED BY COMPANIES
COMPUTERISATION OF THE REGISTRY
INFORMATION FROM THE REGISTER
PROOF OF MATTERS OFF THE REGISTER
PROOF OF UNREGISTERED TITLE
EPITOME OF AN UNREGISTERED TITLE
LAND REGISTRY CHECKS ON UNREGISTERED TITLES
CONVEYANCE OF LAND SUBJECT TO FIRST REGISTRATION
FIRST REGISTRATION MACHINERY
PAPER TITLE AGAINST SQUATTER
PERMISSIVE OCCUPATION
REFORM OF THE LAW OF LIMITATION
TITLE DERIVED FROM POSSESSION
FIRST REGISTRATION WITH TITLE ABSOLUTE
LESSER TITLES: REGISTRATION AND UPGRADING
ADVERSE POSSESSION RIGHTS UNDER THE 1925 ACT
ADVERSE POSSESSION SUCCESSFUL UNDER THE 2002 ACT
REGISTERED LAND MECHANICS UNDER THE 2002 ACT
PURE ALTERATIONS
I. RECTIFICATION (PREJUDICIAL ALTERATION)
K. COVENANTS FOR TITLE
CO-PROPERTIES OF REGISTERED LAND
FORMS OF TRUSTS OF LAND
UNREGISTERED LAND CURTAIN
REGISTERED LAND CURTAIN AND RESTRICTIONS
CONSENTS AND RESTRICTED POWERS
INTERESTS OVERREACHED
POWER-BASED OVERREACHING
DEFECTIVE OVERREACHING
PRE-1997 TRUSTS FOR SALE
OTHER PRE-1997 TRUSTS
PRE-1997 STRICT SETTLEMENTS
PURCHASE FROM ATTORNEYS
BENEFICIAL INTERESTS NOT OVERREACHED
BENEFICIAL ENTITLEMENT REQUIRED
PROTECTED INTERESTS IN UNREGISTERED LAND
HONESTY (ACTUAL NOTICE) AND UNREGISTERED TITLES
DILIGENCE IN RELATION TO UNREGISTERED TITLES
OCCUPIERS OF UNREGISTERED LAND
OCCUPIERS OF REGISTERED LAND
WHEN DO OCCUPIERS BITE?
REMOVAL OF PROTECTION FROM OCCUPIERS
LEGAL CO-OWNERSHIP RECAPPED
IMPOSITION OF THE STATUTORY TRUST
FORMS OF BENEFICIAL CO-OWNERSHIP
IMPLIED CO-OWNERSHIP
CREDITORS ACQUIRING BENEFICIAL INTERESTS
SHARED FAMILY HOMES
CONTRIBUTION-BASED CONSTRUCTIVE TRUSTS
OTHER EXPLANATIONS FOR CASH INJECTIONS
INTENTION-BASED CONSTRUCTIVE TRUSTS
HOLISTIC TRUSTS
ALTERNATIVES TO COMMON INTENTION
LIMITED CO-OWNERHSIP INTERESTS
CO-OWNERS OCCUPYING UNDER TRUSTS OF LAND
OLD CO-OWNERSHIP PURPOSE TRUSTS
CO-OWNERSHIP: THE DECISION TO SELL
RENT AND EQUITABLE ACCOUNTING
BENEFICIARIES AS AGAINST CREDITORS
MATRIMONIAL HOME RIGHT: PROPRIETARY ENFORCEMENT
OCCUPATION RIGHTS CREATED BY DIVORCE COURTS
EQUITABLE LICENCES
PROPRIETARY FORCE OF LICENCES
AGREED AND UNILATERAL NOTICES
REMOVAL OF SPENT ENTRIES
OVERRIDING INTERESTS: A LIST
BURDENS ON FIRST REGISTRATION
PRIORITY: FIRST IN TIME
PRIORITY: PROTECTION OF PURCHASERS
LEGAL BURDENS ON UNREGISTERED LAND
CLASSES OF LAND CHARGE
RESIDUAL BURDENS ON UNREGISTERED LAND
VACATION OF LAND CHARGES
LAND CHARGES: REGISTRATION
LAND CHARGES: SEARCHES
PRIORITY: LAND CHARGES
PRIORITY: OTHER SOLUTIONS
FORMATION OF PAPER-BASED CONTRACTS
E-CONTRACTS AND E-CHAINS
SPECIAL FORMS OF CONTRACT
INVALIDITY OF INFORMAL CONTRACTS
MEANS OF ENFORCING INFORMAL CONTRACTS
CONTRACTS THAT HAVE BEEN ACTED UPON
NEGATIVE EXPECTATIONS (DEFENSIVE ESTOPPEL)
PROPRIETARY FORCE OF ESTOPPEL
LITIGATION AFFECTING LAND
GIFTS TO AVOID CLAIMS
FORMALITY FOR LEGAL LEASES
SUBSTANTIVE REGISTRATION OF LEASES
LEASES NOTED AND OVERRIDING
REGISTRATION OF CERTAIN “PUBLIC” LEASES
TERMINATION BY COMBINATION OF LEASE AND REVERSION
TERMINATION BY BREAK NOTICE
NEGOTIATIONS/TENANCY AT WILL
RENEWAL AND ENFRANCHISEMENT
TERMINATION BY THE TENANTS
CONTROL OF DEALINGS
ESTATE-BASED LIABILITY
COVENANTS NOT RUNNING: NEW LAW
COVENANTS NOT RUNNING: OLD LAW
TENANTS UNABLE TO PAY
SUBSTITUTES LIABILITY
LEGAL MORTGAGES OF REGISTERED LAND
EQUITABLE MORTGAGES OF REGISTERED LAND
LEGAL MORTGAGES OF UNREGISTERED LAND
EQUITABLE MORTGAGES OF UNREGISTERED LAND
MORTGAGES PROTECTED BY DEPOSIT OF TITLE DEEDS
MORTGAGES PROTECTED AS LAND CHARGES
CHARGING ORDERS ON BENEFICIAL INTERESTS
PRINCIPAL, INTERESTS AND COSTS
OVERDRAFT MORTGAGES AND TACKING
TERMS FETTERING REDEMPTION
SALE UNDER EXPRESS POWERS
PROCEEDS OF SALE AND SHORTFALL
REDEMPTION AND DISCHARGE
DISPUTED REDEMPTION
DOMESTIC SECTOR LENDERS
PROPER LENDING PRACTICE
INSTALMENT REPOSSESSION
DOMESTIC REPOSSESSIONS
JUDICIAL DEFERRAL OF REPOSSESSION
PROCEDURAL PROTECTION OF DOMESTIC BORROWERS
REPOSSESSION UNDER CONSUMER CREDIT AGREEMENTS
UNDUE INFLUENCE AND OTHER EQUITABLE MISCONDUCT
INFECTION GEOMETRY
INFECTION BY NOTICE
AVOIDING INFECTION: A FACE TO FACE INTERVIEW
AVOIDING INFECTION: LEGAL ADVICE
Q. REMEDIES FOR UNDUE INFLUENCE
R. NULLITY
PRESUMED BOUNDARIES
MISCELLANEOUS AFFIRMATIVE RIGHTS
EASEMENT-LIKE CHARACTER
NOVEL AFFIRMATIVE RIGHTS
NOVEL RESTRICTIVE EASEMENTS
POSITIVE OBLIGATIONS BETWEEN FREEHOLDERS
MEANS OF ENFORCING POSITIVE OBLIGATIONS
A. LEGAL BURDENS ON UNREGISTERED LAND
B. LAND CHARGES (EQUITABLE BURDENS ON UNREGISTERED
C. NEIGHBOUR BURDENS ON THE REGISTER
D. OVERRIDING INTERESTS
EASEMENTS: NEIGHBOUR PRINCIPLE
EASEMENTS: BENEFITTING RIGHTS
EASEMENTS: LOSS OF BENEFIT
RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS: NEIGHBOUR PRINCIPLE
RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS: SCHEMES OF DEVELOPMENT
RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS: NEIGHBOUR OBLIGATIONS
RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS: ANNEXATION
RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS: FAILURE OF BENEFIT
RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS: REMEDIES
RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS: MODIFICATION
A. GRANTS AND RESERVATIONS
USE-BASED GRANTS
IMPLIED RESERVATIONS
LIGHT REQUIRED ON DIVISION
ROLE OF PRESCRIPTION
TORTIOUS AND ILLEGAL USE
THE FREEHOLD PRESCRIPTION ROLE
SEVERAL PROFITS (GRAZING, FISHING AND “SPORTING”)
What Paul Sinclair liked when he first encountered the Provençal utopia of Eden
Olympia was that
“There’s no ground already staked out, no title deeds going back to bloody Magna Carta.
You feel anything could happen.”1
I hope to have captured some of that spirit in the New Land Law. Most students today
know little of 1066 and All That 2 and view even 1925 as a form of prehistory. So my
aim is to rid land law of its feudal roots and its history and to modernise the badly
dated statutory language—eschewing Latin,3 terms lacking gender neutrality, and
most of the baffling “ees” and “ors” of conventional land law. In Cornwall “a man
who has lost his language has also lost his land”, but not I hope, his land law.
This new edition comes after only four years but it is not a case of “the paper never
refusing the ink”. A sentence by sentence rewriting has been required to accommodate
the seismic changes of the Land Registration Act 2002,4 not to mention commonholds, the explosion of human rights jurisprudence and the remorseless grind of the
case law up to the end of 2002. I have taken the opportunity thus presented to reflect
the development of my thinking on the structural aspects of the subject, jolted by the
new functional structure for protecting third party interests against registered land.
Hence the completely new shape to this edition.
A series of shorter opening chapters each explores one fundamental building block
—registration, land, fragmentation by time (the doctrine of estates), ownership and its
transactional powers, titles to houses flats and commonholds, social controls balanced by the human rights to property, and finally proprietary rights.
The premise of the first edition was that the changes to the land registration scheme
made in 1997 meant it was opportune to abandon the unregistered-registered
dichotomy in favour of a division between registered and registrable land, and that
this in turn required an integrated treatment highlighting how the substantive
principles of the two systems dovetail.5 We are now four years closer to a universal
register. The linkage of the substantive principles of the two systems has been greatly
strengthened as from the October 2003 implementation date of the Land Registration
Act 2002 even as the mechanics are diverging ever more widely. Electronic
conveyancing has important consequences for the proof of title and the registration
JG Ballard, Super Cannes (Flamingo, 2001), 79.
WC Sellar & RJ Yeatman (Methuen).
Fryer v. Pearson [2000] Times April 4th.
The implementation date is October 13th 2003.
City of London BS v. Flegg [1988] AC 54, 84G, Lord Oliver.
Adverse possession against registered titles will be reduced to a shell giving the register a much greater degree of finality. I only hope that my doubts prove to be misplaced. Extended treatment has also been required of the authoritative elucidation of
the concept of adverse possession in Pye,6 enlightenment provided by the courts so
typically just as the concept itself has become practically redundant. The chapters on
adverse possession and the registration curtain appeared at the end of the first edition
for no better reason than I came to write them last and they now move forward to a
proper and prominent position. The mystery of the new system of alteration of the
register is how it links to the old case law on rectification, a topic on which I have
provided some educated guesses.
The new machinery enacted for trusts of land in 1996 implied the need for wider
changes than most teachers of land law were prepared to countenance when this book
first appeared in 1999, but the task of consolidation of all aspects of trusts is now completed, with beneficial co-ownership now fully integrated into the main treatment.
Ownership rights remain separated from occupation rights. A warm welcome is given
to the closer alignment of notice through occupation and the new form of the occupation-based overriding interest.7 An attempt has been made to assist students by
moving some of the more arcane learning into a separate chapter on management
trusts where examination candidates may be able to ignore this material more readily.
The Land Registration Act 2002 has greatly improved the law of burdens. Priority
is simpler—and fits better into my four headings—protected interests, value, diligence
and honesty. Burdens are classified in a new way to draw out the parallels between the
two systems, the fundamentals being rights to transfer, beneficial interests under
trusts that are not overreached, leases, money charges such as mortgages which are
redeemable, and the obligations enforceable within the neighbour principle—easements covenants and positive covenants being treated as one semi-coherent whole.
This mess should be slightly less confusing in this form.
The chapters on leases have been rewritten to link better to the structure of A New
Landlord and Tenant,8 where security of tenure and enfranchisement schemes are
considered in detail. Mortgages are integrated with other money charges but kept
separate from the domestic borrower protection—carved out of the existing administrative controls, statutory protection against repossession, and the case-law developments in the field of undue influence. Etridge seems a mere footnote in a sea of
change.9 Emphasis is placed on the crucial importance of physical division of land,
and the integrated treatment of the obligations enforceable between neighbours is
continued even if the law has to be forced into shape. Surely there is an urgent case for
reform here? Sadly there is no longer space for any serious consideration of planning
law or compulsory purchase.
Readers can be left to judge the opinion of one Regius professor that land law is
complex but not in the end very difficult.10 My own view is that the subject is running
out of control—changing too fast to too little purpose—but that may simply be the
JA Pye (Oxford) v. Lambert [2002] UKHL 30, [2002] 3 All ER 865.
LRA 2002 sch 3 para 2.
Royal Bank of Scotland v. Etridge (No 2) [2001] UKHL 44, [2002] 2 AC 773.
PBH Birks “Before We Begin: Five Keys to Land Law” ch 18 in Bright & Dewar, 457.
advance of middle age. One could scarcely imagine a monarch of the twenty-first century devoting time to the exposition of land law to his nobles, as Edward IV is said to
have done, but still teaching and writing in the subject remains a noble occupation.
This book continues to be dedicated to Helen. Whilst engaged in my calling over the
past four years my debt to her has increased very considerably.
Chold and L Ref A
Law Com CP
LP (MP) A
L Ref A
Charging Orders Act
Law Commission (Report)
Standard Conditions of Sale (3rd ed)
Places of publication are in England unless otherwise stated
Birks’ English Private Law PBH Birks English Private Law (Oxford UP, 2002)
Sir W Blackstone Commentaries on the Laws of England
(Oxford, 1st ed, 1766); page references are to RM Kerr
(Murray, 3rd ed, 1862)
Bright & Dewar
S Bright & J Dewar Land Law – Themes and Perspectives
Cheshire & Burn
GC Cheshire and EB Burn The Modern Law of Real
Property (Butterworths, 16th ed, 2000)
Chappelle Land Law
D Chappelle Land Law (Longman, 5th ed, 2001)
Sir E Coke Commentaries on Littleton’s Tenures (1st ed,
1628); paras are common to all editions
Dixon’s Principles
Martin Dixon Principles of Land Law (Cavendish, 3rd
ed, 2000)
Encyclopædia FP
Lord Millett Encyclopædia of Forms and Precedents
(Butterworths, 5th ed, 1993 and reissues)
Goo’s Sourcebook
SH Goo Sourcebook on Land Law (Cavendish, 3rd ed,
Gravells, LL – Text
NP Gravells Land Law – Text and Materials (Sweet &
Maxwell, 2nd ed, 1999)
Grays’ Elements
K Gray & SF Gray Elements of Land Law (Butterworths,
3rd ed, 2000)
Hayton’s Registered
DJ Hayton Registered Land (Sweet & Maxwell, 3rd ed,
Holdsworth’s History
WS Holdsworth History of English Law (15 vols,
Stevens), page references are to (Methuen, 3rd ed)
Hopkins Informal
N Hopkins Informal Acquisition of Rights in Land (Sweet
& Maxwell, 2000)
Jackson & Wilde
P Jackson & DC Wilde Property Law – Current Issues
and Debates (Dartmouth Ashgate, 1999)
Litteton’s Tenures
Litteton’s Tenures (1st ed, c 1481); references are to
paras common to all editions
Maitland’s Equity
FW Maitland Equity (Cambridge UP, 2nd ed by
J Brunyate, 1936)
Maudsley & Burn LL –
Maudsley & Burn Land Law – Cases and Materials
(Butterworths, 7th ed by EH Burn, 1998)
Sir RE Megarry & Sir HWR Wade & C Harpum, The Law
of Real Property (Stevens, 6th ed by C Harpum, 2000)
Panesar’s General
Ruoff & Roper
Smith’s Property Law
P Sparkes NLL
P Sparkes NLT
Thompson Modern LL
Wolstenholme & Cherry
S Panesar General Principles of Property Law
TBF Ruoff and RB Roper The Law of Registered
Conveyancing (Sweet & Maxwell, 6th ed looseleaf,
RJ Smith Property Law (Longman, 4th ed, 2002)
P Sparkes A New Land Law (Hart, 1st ed, 1999)
MP Thompson Modern Land Law (Oxford, 2001)
Wolstenholme & Cherry’s Conveyancing Statutes
(Stevens, 12th ed by BL Cherry, DH Parry & JRP
Maxwell, 1932); (Oyez,13th ed by JT Farrand, 1972)
1194/86 (Human Rights Applic) .................................................................................................[5.24]
A v. A [1994] 1 FLR 657 ...........................................................................................................[17.40]
A v. B [1997] May 23rd, Cazalet J.............................................................................................[19.27]
A’Court v. Cross (1825) 3 Bing 329, 332, 130 ER 540 ...............................................................[10.01]
Abbahall v. Smee [2002] EWCA Civ 1831, [2002] Times December 28th .......................[10.39] [32.32]
Abbey Homesteads (Developments) v. Northampton CC [1992] 2 EGLR 18, CA......................[34.43]
Abbey National BS v. Bernard [1995] CLYB 3597.....................................................................[30.24]
Abbey National BS v. Cann [1991] 1 AC 56, HL ..........................[14.04] [15.29] [15.39] [15.40] [15.43]
[15.48] [15.50] [15.51] [15.54] [16.15] [16.21] [17.04] [17.12] [19.24] [20.42] [23.38] [30.33]
Abbey National BS v. Maybeech [1985] Ch 190, Nicholls J .......................................................[26.46]
Abbey National BS v. Moss (1994) 26 HLR 249, CA ..................[13.40] [13.41] [14.03] [19.29] [19.58]
Abbey National v. Tufts [1999] 2 FLR 399, CA.........................................................................[30.71]
Abbeyfield (Harpenden) Society v. Woods [1968] 1 WLR 374...................................................[25.76]
Abbot v. Weekley (1665) 1 Lev 176, 83 ER 357.........................................................................[36.41]
Abbot, Re [1983] Ch 45, Div Ct.................................................................................................[24.21]
Abbott, (JW & Co)Re (1913) 30 TLR 13 .................................................................................[27.30]
ABC Coupler & Engineering Co (No 3), Re [1970] 1 WLR 702.................................................[27.44]
Aberconway’s ST, Re [1953] Ch 647, CA ..................................................................................[19.58]
Abergavenny’s case (1607) 6 Co Rep 78b, 77 ER 373.....................................................[12.13] [16.26]
Abidogun v. Frolan Health Care [2001] 45 EG 138 (CS) ............................................................[26.45]
Aboody see BCCI ...............................................................................................................................
Acklom, Re [1929] 1 Ch 195 ......................................................................................................[19.58]
Ackroyd v. Smith (1850) 10 CB 164, 138 ER 68 ......................................[32.20] [32.25] [32.33] [34.01]
Adagio Properties Ltd. v. Ansari [1998] 2 EGLR 69, CA .........................................................[26.35]
Adair v. National Trust [1997] Times December 19th, Girvan J ................................................[31.15]
Adair, Re [1909] 1 IR 311..........................................................................................................[19.58]
Adam & Co International T v. Theodore Goddard [2000] Times March 17th, Evans-Lombe J ...[12.16]
Adam v. Czech Republic (1997) 1 BHRC 451..............................................................................[5.24]
Adams & Kensington Vestry, Re (1883) 24 Ch D 199; (1884) 27 Ch D 394, CA.........................[25.10]
Adams v. Andrews (1850) 15 QB 284, 117 ER 466.....................................................................[19.66]
Adams v. Clutterbuck (1883) 10 QBD 403.................................................................................[25.22]
Adams v. Lincoln Grange Management [1998] 1 EGLR 58, CA .....................................[26.11] [26.15]
Adamson v. Halifax [2002] EWCA Civ 1134, [2002] 1 WLR 60 ................................................[29.37]
Adan v. Newham LBC [2001] EWCA Civ 1916, [2002] 1 WLR 2120 ..........................................[5.51]
Addis v. Burrows [1948] 1 KB 444, CA......................................................................................[25.15]
Addis v. Campbell (1841) 4 Beav 401, 49 ER 394 ......................................................................[30.54]
Adelphi (Estates) v. Christie (1983) 47 P & CR 650, CA .........................................................[27.04]
AG Securities v. Vaughan [1990] 1 AC 417, HL ............................[25.16] [25.73] [25.78] [25.80] [25.81]
Agra Bank v. Barry (1874) LR 7 HL 135 ..................................................................................[28.25]
Agrotexim v. Greece, 14807/89, (1996) 21 EHRR 250 .......................................................[5.25] [5.29]
Agyeman v. Boadi (1997) 28 HLR 558 .....................................................................................[26.10]
Ahearn v. Bellman (1879) 4 Ex D 201, CA ...............................................................................[25.14]
Ahmed v. Kendrick (1988) 56 P & CR 120, CA ..............................................................[16.24] [16.25]
AIB Finance v. Alsop [1998] 2 All ER 929, CA .........................................................................[29.37]
Ainsworth see National Provincial Bank ..............................................................................................
Ainsworth v. Wilding [1905] 1 Ch 435 .......................................................................................[29.33]
Air India v. Balabel [1993] 2 EGLR 66, CA........................................................[27.09] [27.10] [27.11]
Aircool Installations v. British Telecommunications [1995] CLYB 821.........................................[2.24]
Ajayi v. RT Briscoe (Nigeria) [1964] 1 WLR 1326, PC ......................................[23.05] [23.12] [23.30]
Alan (WJ) & Co v. El Nasir Export & Import Co [1972] 2 QB 189, CA .............[23.05] [23.12] [23.30]
Alan Estates v. WG Stores [1982] Ch 511, CA ............................................................................[7.08]
Albany Home Loans v. Massey [1997] 2 All ER 609, CA ...............[5.40] [29.36] [30.24] [30.34] [30.77]
Albert v. Albert [1997] 2 FLR 791, CA......................................................................................[24.21]
Albert v. Belgium, 7299/75, (1983) 5 EHRR 533 .........................................................................[5.50]
Aldersey, Re [1905] 2 Ch 181 .........................................................................................[12.20] [16.09]
Alderson v. Elgey (1884) 26 Ch D 567 .......................................................................................[29.48]
Alderson v. White (1858) 2 De G & J 97, 44 ER 924 .................................................................[10.36]
Aldin v. Latimer Clark Muirhead & Co [1894] 2 Ch 437, Stirling J ................................[19.63] [35.29]
Aldred’s case (1610) 9 Co Rep 57b, 77 ER 816 ..............................................................[32.33] [36.32]
Aldridge v. Duke (1679) Rep t Finch 439, 23 ER 239 ................................................................[28.15]
Aldridge v. Wright [1929] 2 KB 117, CA ..................................................................................[35.09]
Alefounder’s WT, Re [1927] 1 Ch 360........................................................................................[14.11]
Alford v. Vickery (1842) Car & M 280, 174 ER 507 .................................................................[25.17]
Ali v. Khan [2002] EWCA Civ 974, [2002] 30 EG 131 (CS) .........................................................[8.01]
Ali v. Sandwell MBC (1990) 60 P & CR 374 .............................................................................[16.30]
Alison, Re (1879) 11 Ch D 284, CA ..........................................................................................[29.36]
Allcard v. Skinner (1887) 36 Ch D 145, CA ......................[10.47] [30.44] [30.45] [30.46] [30.50] [30.66]
Allcock v. Moorhouse (1882) 9 QBD 366, CA................................................................[27.31] [27.51]
Allen v. Greenhi Builders [1979] 1 WLR 156..............................................................................[24.14]
Allen v. Greenwood [1980] Ch 119, CA ...............................................................[32.28] [32.29] [36.29]
Allen v. IRC [1914] 2 KB 327, CA ............................................................................................[25.87]
Allen v. Rochdale BC [2000] Ch 221, CA...................................................................................[25.62]
Allen v. Snyder [1977] 2 NSWLR 685, Glass JA .......................................................................[17.08]
Allen v. Taylor (1880) 16 Ch D 355 ....................................................................[35.09] [35.13] [35.30]
Allhusen v. Brooking (1884) 26 Ch D 559..................................................................................[25.31]
Alliance & Leicester v. Slayford (2001) 33 HLR 66, CA............................................................[30.77]
Alliance BS v. Pinwill [1958] Ch 788 .........................................................................................[30.19]
Alliance BS v. Shave [1952] Ch 581 ...........................................................................................[29.22]
Allied Dunbar Assurance v. Fowle [1994] 1 EGLR 122, Garland J ............................................[27.48]
Allied Dunbar Assurance v. Homebase [2002] EWCA Civ 666, [2002] 27 EG 144......................[27.14]
Allied Irish Bank Group v. Hennelley Properties [2000] CLYB 4665, CA ..................................[28.05]
Allied Irish Bank v. Byrne [1995] 2 FLR 325, Ferris J ..............................................................[30.49]
Allied London Investments v. Hambro Life Assurance (1985) 50 P & CR 207, CA ....................[27.56]
Alms Corn Charity, Re [1901] 2 Ch 750, Stirling J .........................................................[15.08] [15.18]
Alpenstow v. Regalian [1985] 1 WLR 721, Nourse J ......................................................[20.11] [22.16]
Alton Corp, Re [1985] BCLC 27.....................................................................................[22.32] [28.19]
Al-Wazir v. Islamic Press Agency [2001] EWCA Civ 1276, [2002] 2 P & CR 12 @ 157 .............[29.02]
Amalgamated Investment & Property Co v. Texas Commerce International
Bank [1982] QB 84, Robert Goff J and CA.........................................[23.07] [23.12] [23.30] [23.31]
Ambler v. Gordon [1905] 1 KB 417, Bray J ...............................................................................[32.29]
Amec Developments v. Jury’s Hotel Management (UK) [2001] 1 EGLR 81, Ch D ...................[34.33]
American Express International Banking Corporation v. Hurley [1985] 3 All ER 564 ................[29.37]
Ames, Re [1893] 2 Ch 479..........................................................................................................[19.58]
Amory v. Delamirie (1722) 1 Str 505, 93 ER 664.........................................................................[2.29]
Amsprop Trading v. Harris Distribution [1997] 1 WLR 1025, Neuberger J ........[27.29] [32.51] [34.23]
Anchor Trust Co v. Bell [1926] Ch 805, Lawrence J...................................................................[29.23]
Anderson v. Bostock [1976] Ch 312 ...........................................................................................[36.39]
Anderson, Re [1920] 1 Ch 175 ...................................................................................................[19.55]
Anderton v. Clwyd CC [2002] EWCA Civ 933, [2002] 1 WLR 3174 ..........................................[10.19]
Andrew v. Andrew [1990] 2 FLR 376.........................................................................................[19.31]
Andrews v. Brewer (1998) 30 HLR 203, CA ..............................................................................[25.68]
Andrews v. City Permanent Benefit BS (1881) 44 LT 641 .........................................................[29.50]
Andrews v. Waite [1907] 2 Ch 500 .............................................................................................[34.03]
Ankerson v. Connelly [1900] 2 Ch 544; [1907] 1 Ch 678, CA .....................................................[34.03]
Annen v. Rattee [1985] 1 EGLR 136, CA ......................................................................[17.11] [25.17]
Anon (1363) Jenk 43, 145 ER 33 ....................................................................................[13.11] [13.51]
Anon (1465) Cary 10, 21 ER 5,..................................................................................................[15.07]
Anon (1560) Dyer 187, 73 ER 412.............................................................................................[16.44]
Anon YB 5 Edw 4, 7..................................................................................................................[15.07]
Antoniades v. Villiers [1990] 1 AC 417, HL.........................................................[25.79] [25.80] [25.81]
Appah v. Parncliffe [1964] 1 WLR 1064, CA ............................................................................[25.76]
Appleby v. Cowley [1982] Times April 14th, Megarry V-C........................................................[23.36]
Appleton v. Appleton [1965] 1 WLR 25, CA...................................................................[19.11] [19.23]
Arab Bank v. Mercantile Holdings [1994] Ch 71, Millett J ........................................................[29.29]
Araghchinchi v. Araghchinchi [1997] 2 FLR 142, CA ...............................................................[24.24]
Argyle BS v. Hammond (1985) 49 P & CR 148, CA.......................................................[11.47] [24.26]
Arkwright v. Gell (1839) 5 M & W 203, 151 ER 87 ........................................................[36.12] [32.21]
Arlesford Trading Co v. Servansingh [1971] 1 WLR 1080, CA ..................................................[27.51]
Armitage v. Nurse [1997] 2 All ER 705, CA .............................................................................[10.53]
Armstrong & Holmes v. Holmes [1993] 1 WLR 1482, Ch D ......................................................[24.07]
Armstrong v. Sheppard & Short [1959] 2 QB 384, CA ....................................................[19.68] [32.26]
Arnold v. Jefferson (1679) Holt KB 498, 90 ER 1174 ................................................................[32.33]
Arnold v. National Westminster Bank [1991] 2 AC 93, HL ........................................................[23.05]
Arogundade v. Brent LBC [2002] HLR 18 @ 397 .......................................................................[5.52]
Arthur Maiden v. Patel [1990] 1 EGLR 269, Mummery J..............................................[19.66] [19.67]
Artizans Labourers & General Dwellings Co v. Whitaker [1919] 2 KB 301, Astbury J ..............[25.82]
Asco Developments v. Gordon [1978] 2 EGLR 41, Megarry V-C ..............................................[26.10]
Ashburn Anstalt v. Arnold & Co [1989] Ch 1, CA ......................................[6.10] [15.45] [19.70] [19.76]
[19.79] [19.81] [20.19] [20.45] [22.25] [25.19]
Ashe v. Mumford (2000) 33 HLR 67, CA..................................................................................[17.12]
Asher v. Whitlock (1865) LR 1 QB 1, Exch Ch ..............................................................[10.28] [10.29]
Ashford v. Thornton (1818) 1 B & Ald 405, 106 ER 149 ..............................................................[2.10]
Ashforth, Re [1905] 1 Ch 535, Farwell J...........................................................................[3.28] [18.11]
Ashley Guarantee v. Zacaria [1993] 1 WLR 62, CA .................................................................[30.24]
Ashton v. Sobelman [1987] 1 WLR 177 ....................................................................................[26.46]
Ashworth Frazer v. Gloucester CC [2001] UKHL 59, [2001] 1 WLR 2180 ................................[27.11]
Ashworth v. Mounsey (1853) 9 Exch 175, 156 ER 75.................................................................[28.19]
Aslan v. Murphy (No 1) [1990] 1 WLR 766, CA ................................................[25.73] [25.76] [25.81]
Assaf v. Fuwa [1955] AC 215, PC ..................................................................................[15.09] [16.28]
Associated British Ports v. CH Bailey [1990] 2 AC 703, HL...........................................[26.36] [26.45]
Associated Provincial Picture Houses v. Wednesbury Corp [1948] 1 KB 223, CA ........................[5.18]
Aston Cantlow etc PCC v. Wallbank [2001] EWCA Civ 713, [2002] Ch 51 ............[5.19] [5.31] [20.33]
Aston v. Smallman (1706) 2 Vern 556, 23 ER 960, Cowper LK................................................[16. 06]
Atkin v. Rose [1923] 1 Ch 522 ..................................................................................................[27.28]
Atkins WT, Re [1974] 1 WLR 761.............................................................................................[19.14]
Atkinson & Horsell’s C, Re [1912] 2 Ch 1, CA ......................................................[9.02] [10.30] [10.31]
Atombrook v. Heather Weston [1988]........................................................................................[20.10]
Att-Gen for Alberta v. Huggard Assets [1953] AC 420, PC ................................................[3.33] [3.36]
Att-Gen for British Columbia v. Att-Gen for Canada [1914] AC 153, HL .......................[31.15] [31.16]
Att-Gen for Hong Kong v. Fairfax [1997] 1 WLR 149, PC .......................................................[34.36]
Att-Gen for Southern Nigeria v. John Holt & Co (Liverpool) [1915] AC 599, PC ......................[32.15]
Att-Gen for the Duchy of Lancaster v. GE Overton (Farms) [1982] Ch 277 ......................[2.28] [2.31]
Att-Gen of Hong Kong v. Humphreys Estates (Queen’s Gardens)
[1987] AC 114, PC ..............................................................................[22.15] [23.02] [23.15] [23.17]
Att-Gen of Ontario v Mercer (1883) 8 App Cas 767, PC ..........................................[3.35] [3.44] [3.48]
Att-Gen to Prince of Wales v. Collom [1916] 2 KB 193, 203 ...........................................[23.19] [23.24]
Att-Gen v. Acton Local Board (1882) 22 Ch D 221, Fry J. ........................................................[36.04]
Att-Gen v. Antrobus [1905] 2 Ch 188 Farwell J. ..........................[32.22] [36.08] [36.23] [36.48] [36.49]
Att-Gen v. Baliol College (1744) 9 Mod Rep 407, 412, 88 ER 538.............................................[23.06]
Att-Gen v. Beynan [1970] 1 Ch 1 ..............................................................................................[31.14]
Att-Gen v. Biphosphated Guano Co (1879) 11 Ch D 327, CA................................[6.03] [15.07] [15.12]
Att-Gen v. Blake [1998] Ch 439, CA; [2001] 1 AC 268, HL .......................................................[34.33]
Att-Gen v. Brotherton (ex rel Yorkshire Derwent Trust) [1992] 1 AC 425, HL ...[31.14] [36.50] [36.51]
Att-Gen v. Cocke [1988] Ch 414 ................................................................................................[10.53]
Att-Gen v. Doughty (1752) 2 Ves Sen 453, 28 ER 290, Hardwicke LC ...........................[32.32] [32.33]
Att-Gen v. Hanmer (1858) 27 LJ Ch 837 ...................................................................................[36.40]
Att-Gen v. Jacobs Smith [1895] 2 QB 341, CA...........................................................................[15.11]
Att-Gen v. Moore [1893] 1 Ch 676...............................................................................................[2.28]
Att-Gen v. Morgan [1891] 1 Ch 432...........................................................................................[31.19]
Att-Gen v. Nichol (1809) 16 Ves 338, 33 ER 1012, Eldon LC ...................................................[32.29]
Att-Gen v. Odell [1906] 2 Ch 47, CA ..............................................................................[11.57] [24.27]
Att-Gen v. Owen (1805) 10 Ves 555, 32 ER 960, Eldon LC ......................................................[25.02]
Att-Gen v. Parsons [1956] AC 421, HL ................................................................[3.44] [11.07] [24.27]
Att-Gen v. Queen Anne Garden & Mansions Co (1899) 60 LT 759, Kekewich J .........................[32.28]
Att-Gen v. Shadwell [1910] 1 Ch 92, Warrington J ....................................................................[14.28]
Att-Gen v. Simpson [1901] 2 Ch 671 ..........................................................................................[36.17]
Att-Gen v. Tomline (1880) 5 Ch D 750, Fry J ............................................................................[10.45]
Att-Gen v. Wright [1897] 2 QB 318............................................................................................[36.17]
Attley v. Cherwell DC (1989) 21 HLR 613, CA.........................................................................[25.85]
Attwater v. Attwater (1853) 18 Beav 330, 52 ER 131 .................................................................[3.28]
Attwood v. Bovis Homes [2001] Ch 379, Neuberger J ................................................................[34.09]
Aubergine Enterprises v. Lakewood International [2002] EWCA Civ 177;
[2001] 39 EG 141, Ch D........................................................................................................[27.14]
Auriol v. Mills (1790) 4 Term Rep 94, 100 ER 912....................................................................[27.50]
Austerberry v. Oldham Corp (1885) 29 Ch D 752, CA ........................................[32.38] [32.44] [32.48]
Austin v. Keele (1987) 61 AJLR 605, PC ..........................[17.10] [17.23] [17.27] [17.28] [17.29] [23.30]
Austin-Fell v. Austin-Fell [1990] Fam 172, Waite J ...................................................................[28.44]
Australian Blue Metal v. Hughes [1963] AC 74, PC...................................................................[19.63]
Aveling v. Knipe (1815) 19 Ves 441, 34 ER 550 .........................................................................[16.21]
Averbrian v. Willmalight [1994] CLYB 2799. ...........................................................................[27.58]
Avon Finance v. Bridger [1985] 2 All ER 281, CA...............................................[30.45] [30.49] [30.63]
Ayer v. Benton (1967) 204 EG 359, Buckley J ...............................................................[14.03] [19.58]
Ayerst v. Jenkins (1873) LR 16 Eq 275......................................................................................[17.34]
Aylward v. Fawaz (1997) 29 HLR 408, CA ..............................................................................[25.65]
Aynsley v. Glover (1874) LR 10 Ch App 283......................................................[36.03] [36.25] [36.32]
Azfar’s Applic, Re [2002] 1 P & CR 18 @ 215, L Tr..................................................................[34.42]
B & Q v. Liverpool & Lancashire Properties [2001] 1 EGLR 92, Blackburne J ..........................[32.03]
B v. B (No 2) [1995] 1 FLR 374, CA .................................................................[15.15] [24.20] [24.24]
B, Re [2000] Ch 662 ..................................................................................................................[14.25]
Bacon v. Bacon [1947] P 151, Wilmer J...............................................................[14.03] [14.12] [19.55]
Bagot’s S, Re [1894] 1 Ch 177 ........................................................................................[13.17] [19.10]
Bailey v. Barnes [1894] 1 Ch 25, CA .................................[14.04] [15.09] [15.14] [15.17] [15.20] [29.23]
Bailey v. Hobson (1869) LR 5 Ch App 180 ....................................................................[16.47] [19.21]
Bailey v. Stephens (1862) 12 CB (NS) 91, 142 ER 1077..............................................................[32.20]
Bailey, Re [1977] 1 WLR 278, Div Ct .......................................................................................[19.26]
Bain v. Brand (1876) 1 App Cas 762, HL ..........................................................................[2.23] [2.25]
Bainbrigge v. Brown (1881) 18 Ch D 188, Fry J ......................................[24.30] [30.44] [30.58] [30.59]
Bairstow Eves (Securities) v. Ripley (1992) 65 P & CR 230, CA...............................................[25.10]
Baker v. Baker (1993) 25 HLR 408, CA .............................................................[19.73] [23.28] [23.36]
Baker v. Gray (1875) 1 Ch D 491, Hall V-C..............................................................................[29.50]
Baker v. Merckel [1960] 1 QB 656, CA .........................................................................[27.50] [27.63]
Baker v. Wind (1748) 1 Ves Sen 160, 27 ER 956 ............................................................[29.10] [30.38]
Bakewell Management v. Brandwood [2003] Times February 5th, CA .....................................[36.16]
Balfour v. Balfour [1919] 2 KB 571 ...........................................................................................[19.73]
Balfour v. Kensington Gardens Mansions (1932) 49 TLR 29 ......................................................[27.14]
Balkis Consolidated Co, Re (1888) 58 LT 300 .............................................................................[7.05]
Ball v. Cullimore (1835) 2 Cr M & R 120, 150 ER 51................................................................[25.87]
Ball, Re [1930] WN 111 ............................................................................................................[19.14]
Ballard v. Tomkinson (1885) 29 Ch D 115.................................................................................[31.16]
Ballard’s Conveyance, Re [1937] Ch 473, Clauson J ..................................................................[34.27]
Banco Exterior Internacional v. Mann [1995] 1 All ER 936, CA..............[30.49] [30.66] [30.67] [30.71]
Banco Exterior Internacional v. Thomas [1997] 1 WLR 221, CA ...................................[30.67] [30.71]
Bank Melli Iran v. Samadi-Rad [1995] 2 FLR 367, CA .............................................................[30.43]
Bank of Baroda v. Dhillon [1998] 1 FLR 524, CA ..........................................................[13.41] [19.29]
Bank of Baroda v. Rayarel (1995) 27 HLR 387, CA ...............................[30.49] [30.50] [30.66] [30.71]
Bank of Ceylon v. Kandar [1962] AC 314, PC ...........................................................................[29.35]
Bank of Cyprus (London) v. Markan [1999] 2 All ER 707, Ch D..............................................[30.50]
Bank of Cyprus v. Gill [1980] 2 Lloyds Rep 51, CA...................................................................[29.37]
Bank of India v. Mody [1998] 12 LSG 29, Ch D...................................................[23.27][23.33][28.19]
Bank of Ireland v. Bell [2001] 2 FLR 809 .......................................................................[16.24] [19.27]
Bank of Montreal v. Stuart [1911] AC 120, PC .........................................................................[30.49]
Bank of New South Wales v. O’Connor (1889) 14 App Cas 273, PC..........................................[29.47]
Bank of Scotland v. Bennett [1997] 1 FLR 801, CA; see Royal Bank of
Scotland v. Etridge (No 2), HL .....................................................................[30.45] [30.50] [30.52]
Bank of Scotland v. Grimes [1985] QB 1179, CA ................................................[30.20] [30.23] [30.28]
Bank of Scotland v. Hill [2002] EWCA Civ 1081, [2002] 29 EG 152 (CS) .................................[30.68]
Bankers Trust Co v. Namdar [1996] EGCS 20, CA ........................................................[16.24] [19.26]
Bankhart v. Tennant (1870) LR 10 Eq 141 ..................................................................................[6.09]
Banks v. Ripley [1940] Ch 719, Morton J ..................................................................................[16.16]
Banner Homes Group v. Luff Developments [2000] Ch 372, CA.................................................[22.39]
Banner v. Berridge (1881) 18 Ch D 254, Kay J..........................................................................[29.33]
Bannister v. Bannister [1948] 2 All ER 133, CA...........................[19.56] [19.57] [19.59] [19.79] [19.80]
Banque Financière de la Cité v. Parc (Battersea) [1999] 1 AC 221, HL ....................................[29.34]
Banque Jacques Cartier v. Banque d’ Épargne de Montreal (1887) 13 App Cas 111, PC ............[23.21]
Banque National de Paris v. Montman [2000] 1 BCLC 576, Ch D .............................................[28.40]
Banque Worms v. The Maule [1997] 1 WLR 528, PC ...............................................................[29.21]
Barakat v. Ealing LBC [1996] 36 RVR 138, Brooke J....................................................[25.61] [25.63]
Barber v. Shah (1985) 17 HLR 584 ...........................................................................................[21.26]
Barber v. Staffordshire CC [1996] 2 All ER 748, CA.................................................................[23.05]
Barclay v. Barclay [1970] 2 QB 677, CA ........................................................................[16.17] [19.14]
Barclay v. Kiley [1961] 1 WLR 1050 .........................................................................................[30.35]
Barclays Bank v. Alcorn [2002] March 11th, Hart J ..................................................................[30.18]
Barclays Bank v. Beck [1952] 2 QB 47, CA ..............................................................................[29.04]
Barclays Bank v. Bee [2001] EWCA Civ 1126, [2001] 37 EG 153 ..............................................[25.15]
Barclays Bank v. Bird [1954] Ch 274, Harman J .......................................................................[29.15]
Barclays Bank v. Boulter [1999] 1 WLR 1919, HL.........................................................[30.56] [30.59]
Barclays Bank v. Buhr [2001] EWCA Civ 1223, [2001] 31 EG 103 (CS) ....................................[29.33]
Barclays Bank v. Burgess [2002] EWCA Civ 291, [2002] 12 EG 135 (CS) .................................[29.33]
Barclays Bank v. Caplan [1998] 1 FLR 532, CA ......................................................................[30.66]
Barclays Bank v. Coleman, reported with Royal Bank of Scotland v. Etridge
(No 2) ........................................................................[30.48] [30.49] [30.50] [30.60] [30.66] [30.68]
Barclays Bank v. Estates & Commercial [1997] 1 WLR 415, CA .............[15.53] [15.55] [21.12] [28.30]
Barclays Bank v. Forrester [1987] CLYB 2537 ..........................................................................[28.41]
Barclays Bank v. Harris reported with Royal Bank of Scotland v. Etridge
(No 2) ..........................................................................................................[30.48] [30.50] [30.77]
Barclays Bank v. Hendricks [1996] 1 FLR 258 ...............................................................[19.26] [28.44]
Barclays Bank v. Kennedy [1989] 1 FLR 356, CA .....................................................................[30.63]
Barclays Bank v. Khaira [1993] 1 FLR 343, CA.............................................................[15.05] [30.55]
Barclays Bank v. O’Brien [1994] 1 AC 180, HL ......................................[15.06] [30.42] [30.43] [30.49]
[30.51] [30.56] [30.57] [30.60] [30.63] [30.64] [30.66] [30.71]
Barclays Bank v. Prudential Assurance [1998] 1 EGLR 44, Ch D .......................[26.46] [27.47] [27.48]
Barclays Bank v. Taylor [1974] Ch 137, CA ..............................................................................[20.40]
Barclays Bank v. Thompson [1997] 4 All ER 816, CA ....................................................[30.67] [30.71]
Barings Securities v. DG Durham Group [1993] EGCS 192, Ferris J .........................................[27.09]
Barker v. Illingworth [1908] 2 Ch 20 .........................................................................................[29.22]
Barkshire v. Grubb (1881) 18 Ch D 616 .........................................................................[35.07] [35.09]
Barlow v. Rhodes (1833) 1 Cr & M 439, 149 ER 471 .................................................................[34.02]
Barnes v. Cadogan Developments [1930] 1 Ch 479............................................................[6.07] [33.14]
Barnett v. Hassett [1981] 1 WLR 1385 ...............................................................[19.37] [19.46] [19.48]
Barney v. BP Truckshops [1995] CLYB 1854 ...........................................................................[36.07]
Barnhardt v. Greenshields (1853) 9 Moo PCC 18, 14 ER 204,
PC................................................................................[15.14] [15.21] [15.22] [15.25] [15.37] [29.10]
Barratt v. Gough-Thomas [1951] 2 All ER 48, Danckwerts J .........................................[29.03] [29.47]
Barratt v. Richardson [1930] 1 KB 686, Wright J ......................................................................[10.40]
Barrett v. Halifax BS (1995) 28 HLR 634 ................................................................................[29.31]
Barrett v. Hartley (1866) LR 2 Eq 789, Stuart V-C ......................................................[29.13] [30.37]
Barrett v. Hilton Developments [1975] Ch 237, CA .............................................[21.13] [21.27] [24.06]
Barrett v. Morgan [2000] 2 AC 264, HL .............................................................[25.14] [25.62] [25.64]
Barron v. Willis [1900] 2 Ch 121, CA ........................................................................................[30.54]
Barrow v. Isaacs & Son [1891] 1 QB 417, CA ............................................................................[27.09]
Barrow v. Manning [1880] WN 108 ...........................................................................................[29.50]
Barry v. Hasseldine [1952] 2 All ER 317, Danckwerts J ...........................................................[35.21]
Barry v. Heathcote Ball [2000] 3 EGLR 7, CA .........................................................................[22.22]
Bartlett v. Tottenham [1932] 1 Ch 114 ...........................................................................[35.07] [36.12]
Barton v. Bank of New South Wales (1890) 15 App Cas 379, PC ..............................................[29.10]
Barton v. Morris [1985] 1 WLR 1257 .................................................................[16.14] [16.22] [16.46]
Basham, Re [1986] 1 WLR 1498 ............................[19.71] [23.09] [23.19] [23.28] [23.29] [23.40] [23.42]
Basingstoke & Deane BC v. Paice [1995] 2 EGLR 9, CA ..........................................................[25.63]
Basma v. Weekes [1950] AC 441, PC ........................................................................................[22.03]
Bass Holdings v. Lewis [1986] 2 EGLR 40, CA ........................................................................[25.03]
Bass Holdings v. Morton Music [1988] Ch 493, CA...................................................................[25.10]
Bass v. Gregory (1890) 25 QBD 481 ........................................................[32.22] [32.33] [36.03] [36.18]
Bastable, Re [1901] 2 KB 518 ....................................................................................................[27.48]
Batchelor v. Marlow [2001] 1 EGLR 119, CA; (No 2) [2001] EWCA Civ 1051,
(2001) 82 P & CR 36.............................................................................................................[32.17]
Batchelor v. Murphy [1920] AC 63, HL.....................................................................................[25.10]
Bate, Re [1947] 2 All ER 418 .........................................................................................[12.20] [16.09]
Baten’s case (1610) 9 Co Rep 53b, 77 ER 810 ...........................................................................[31.22]
Bater v. Bater [1999] 4 All ER 944, CA.....................................................................................[25.17]
Bates v. Donaldson [1896] 2 QB 241, CA ......................................................................[27.11] [27.13]
Bath & NE Somerset DC v. Nicholson [2002] 10 EG 156 (CS) ..................................................[10.12]
Bath & Wells DBF v. Jenkinson [2002] EWHC 218, [2002] 3 WLR 202,
Etherton J .......................................................................................................[3.46] [14.28] [14.29]
Bath v. Bowles (1905) 93 LT 801...............................................................................................[27.51]
Bathavon RDC v. Carlile [1958] 1 QB 461, CA .........................................................................[25.15]
Batstone v. Salter (1875) LR 10 Ch App 431 ............................................................................[17.19]
Batt v. Adams [2001] 2 EGLR 92, Laddie J........................................................[10.06] [10.45] [11.45]
Battersea Freehold & Leasehold Co v. Wandsworth LBC [2001] 2 EGLR 75,
Rimer J ..........................................................................................................[10.01] [10.04] [10.45]
Battersea v. London City Sewers Commissioners [1895] 2 Ch 708..............................................[36.18]
Battison v. Hobson [1896] 2 Ch 403 ..........................................................................................[28.23]
Baumgartner v. Baumgartner (1988) 164 CLR 137....................................................................[17.42]
Baxendale v. Instow PC [1982] Ch 14, Megarry V-C .....................................................[31.15] [36.40]
Baxter v. Four Oaks Properties [1965] Ch 816, Cross J ...........................[34.15] [34.16] [34.18] [34.33]
Baygreen Properties v. Gil [2002] EWCA Civ 1340, [2002] 49 EG 126 ......................................[26.10]
Bayley v. Great Western Rly (1884) 26 Ch D 434, CA .............................................................[35.09]
Baylye v. Hughes (1628) Cro Car 137, 79 ER 720 ....................................................................[27.27]
Baynton v. Morgan (1888) 22 QBD 74, CA ..................................................................[27.33] [27.50]
BCCI v. Aboody [1990] 1 QB 923, CA ...........................................[7.06] [30.43] [30.44] [30.45] [30.47]
[30.48] [30.50] [30.58] [30.63] [30.64] [30.75]
BCCI v. Ali [2001] UKHL 8, [2002] AC 251 .............................................................................[27.58]
BCCI v. Tan [1999] November 19th, Ch D ...............................................................................[10.53]
BCCI, Re (No 8) [1997] 4 All ER 568, HL ..............................................................................[29.35]
Beachway Management v. Wisewell [1971] Ch 610, Plowman J.................................................[32.55]
Beale v. Worth [1993] EGCS 135, CA .......................................................................................[27.11]
Beale’s ST, Re [1932] 2 Ch 15, Maugham J...............................................................................[13.40]
Beaney, Re [1978] 1 WLR 770 ...........................................................................[11.57] [14.15] [24.28]
Beard v. UK, 24883/94, (2001) 33 EHRR 19 @ 442 ....................................................................[5.47]
Beaufort v. John Aird & Co (1904) 20 TLR 602 ........................................................................[10.06]
Beaufort (Duke of) v. Patrick (1853) 17 Beav 60, 51 ER 954 .................[23.06] [23.19] [23.21] [23.40]
Beavan, Re [1912] 1 Ch 196.......................................................................................................[10.15]
Beckett (Alfred F) v. Lyons [1967] Ch 449, CA ..........................[10.23] [36.11] [36.33] [36.48] [36.49]
Beckford v. Beckford (1774) Lofft 490, 98 ER 763 ....................................................................[17.19]
Beckford v. Wade (1805) 17 Ves 87, Grant MR ........................................................................[10.47]
Beckham v. Drake (1849) 2 HLC 579, 9 ER 1213 .....................................................................[34.21]
Becton Dickinson UK v. Zwebner [1989] QB 208, McNeill J ..........................................[27.52] [27.61]
Bedding v. McCarthy (1995) 27 HLR 103, CA..........................................................................[25.68]
Beddington v. Atlee (1887) 35 Ch D 317, Chitty J ..........................................................[34.04] [35.17]
Beddoes v. Shaw [1937] Ch 81, Bennett J ..................................................................................[29.23]
Bedford (Duke of) v. Trustees of British Museum reported in Sugden on Vendors
(Sweets, 10th ed, 1846) app, 57; (1822) 2 My & K 552, 39 ER 1055 ...............[32.38] [32.40] [34.36]
Bedson v. Bedson [1965] 2 QB 666, CA .................[13.42] [16.06] [16.30] [16.38] [19.11] [19.12] [19.23]
Bedwell Park Quarry Co, Re v. Hertfordshire CC [1993] JPL 349, CA .....................................[34.38]
Beechwod Homes’s Applic, Re (1992) 64 P & CR 535, L Tr;
[1994] 2 EGLR 178, CA.................................................................................[34.19] [34.42] [35.28]
Beegas Nominees v. BHP Petroleum [1998] 2 EGLR 57, CA .............................[27.47] [27.48] [27.58]
Beesly v. Hallwood Estates [1960] 1 WLR 549, Buckley J;
on appeal [1961] Ch 105, CA................................[7.08] [7.30] [21.13] [23.05] [23.12] [24.06] [24.07]
Beetham, Re (1887) 18 QBD 766, CA .......................................................................................[28.19]
Beevor v. Luck (1867) LR 4 Eq 537...........................................................................................[29.50]
Begum v. Tower Hamlets LBC [2002] EWCA Civ 239, [2002] 2 All ER 668; [2003] UKHL 5 ....[5.51]
Behrens v. Betram Mills Circus [1957] 2 QB 1 ............................................................................[2.35]
Belabel v. Mehmet [1990] 1 EGLR 220, CA .............................................................................[25.87]
Belcourt v. Belcourt [1989] 1 WLR 195, Morritt J.....................................................................[21.21]
Belgravia Insurance Co v. Meah [1964] 1 QB 436, CA...............................................................[28.04]
Belize Estates & Produce Co v. Quilter [1897] AC 367, PC ..............................................[3.36] [11.29]
Bell Street Investments v. Wood (1970) 216 EG 585, O’Connor J..............................................[25.32]
Bell v. Balls [1897] 1 Ch 663......................................................................................................[22.22]
Bell v. General Accident Fire & Life Assurance Corp [1998] 1 EGLR 69, CA ............................[30.33]
Bell, Re [1896] 1 Ch 1, CA ........................................................................................................[29.33]
Belton v. Bass Ratcliffe & Gretton [1922] 2 Ch 449 ...................................................................[29.33]
Bendall v. McWhirter [1952] 2 QB 466 ......................................................................................[19.67]
Benn v. Hardinge (1992) 66 P & CR 246, CA ............................................................................[34.08]
Bennet v. Bennet (1879) 10 Ch D 474, CA ..........................................................[17.16] [17.17] [17.19]
Bennett & Tarmarlin’s Applic, Re (1987) 54 P & CR 378 ..........................................................[34.43]
Bennett Properties v. H & S Engineering [1998] CLYB 3683, QBD ...............................[25.13] [25.82]
Bennett see Bank of Scotland ....................................................................................................[30.48]
Bennett v. Walker (1737) West temp Hard 130, 25 ER 857 .......................................................[15.12]
Bennison v. Cartwright (1864) 5 B & S 1, 122 ER 733 ...............................................................[36.18]
Bentley v. Bates (1840) 4 Y & C Ex 182, 160 ER 971 ...............................................................[29.48]
Benyon v. Nettlefold (1850) 3 Mac & G 94, 42 ER 196, Truro LC ............................................[17.34]
Berens v. Fellowes (1887) 56 LT 391 .........................................................................................[18.09]
Beresford-Hope, Re [1917] 1 Ch 287, Eve J ................................................................................[2.21]
Berg (E & L) Homes v. Grey [1980] 1 EGLR 103, CA .......................................[19.62][19.63][23.25]
Beringer v. Beringer [2003] January HL .....................................................................................[5.46]
Berkeley Leisure Group v. Lee (1997) 73 P & CR 493, CA .......................................................[27.09]
Berkeley Leisure Group v. Williamson [1996] EGCS 18, CA .....................................................[22.30]
Berkeley Road (88), NW 9, Re [1971] Ch 648, Plowman J .....................[16.30] [16.41] [16.42] [25.15]
Berkely v. Poulett [1977] 1 EGLR 86, CA .....................................................[2.22] [2.23] [2.24] [2.26]
Berkshire Capital Funding v. Street [1999] 2 EGLR 92, CA ......................................................[30.36]
Bernard v. Josephs [1982] Ch 391, CA...............................[16.04] [16.13] [16.14] [16.21] [17.05] [17.10]
[17.11] [17.13] [17.14] [17.15] [17.39] [19.12] [19.22] [19.23] [19.24]
Bernhardt v. Galsworthy [1929] 1 Ch 549 .......................................................................[13.09] [13.46]
Bernstein v. Skyviews & General [1978] QB 479, Griffiths J.......................................................[31.23]
Berry v. Green [1938] AC 575, HL ............................................................................................[18.13]
Berwick & Co v. Price [1905] Ch 632 ........................................................................................[28.25]
Beswick v. Beswick [1968] AC 56, HL............................................................................[34.21] [34.23]
Betterkey v. Joseph [1991] Independent November 1st ............................................................[26.38]
Bettison v. Langton [2001] UKHL 24, [2002] AC 27; [2000] Ch 54, CA................[3.27] [36.34] [36.42]
Betts (J) & Sons v. Price (1924) 40 TLR 589............................................................................[27.31]
Bevan v. Johnston [1990] 2 EGLR 33, CA ..........................................................[14.03] [14.13] [19.59]
Bevan v. London Portland Cement Co (1892) 67 LT 615, Romer J ............................................[36.24]
Bevan, Ex p (1803) 9 Ves 223, 32 ER 588 ..................................................................................[29.02]
Bevil’s case (1583) 4 Co Rep 6a, 76 ER 860 ................................................................................[3.33]
Bewley v. Atkinson (1879) 13 Ch D 283, CA .............................................................................[36.30]
Bhogal v. Cheema [1998] 2 EGLR 50, Ch D .............................................................................[25.63]
Bhojwani v. Kingsley Investment Trust [1992] 2 EGLR 70 .........................................................[26.45]
Bhopal v. Walia [1999] 14 LSG 33, CA ....................................................................................[25.81]
BHP Petroleum Great Britain v. Chesterfield Properties [2001] EWCA Civ 1797,
[2002] Ch 194 ................................................................................................[26.15] [27.22] [27.34]
Bhullar v. McArdle [2001] EWCA Civ 510, (2001) 82 P & CR 38 @ 481........................[20.19] [24.30]
Bickel v. Duke of Westminster [1977] QB 517, CA.........................................................[27.10] [27.12]
Bickford v. Parson (1848) 5 CB 920, 136 ER 1141 .........................................................[27.31] [27.51]
Biggs v. Hoddinott [1898] 2 Ch 30, CA .........................................................................[29.12] [29.13]
Bignold, Ex p (1832) 2 Deac & Ch 398, Eldon LC ....................................................................[29.15]
Bills v. Fernandez-Gonzalez (1981) 132 NLJ 66, CA .................................................................[10.06]
Billson v. Residential Apartments [1992] 1 AC 494, HL .......................................[26.43] [26.44] [26.46]
Billson v. Residential Apartments (No 2) [1993] EGCS 150 .....................................................[26.45]
Billson v. Residential Apartments (No 3) [1993] EGCS 55 .........................................................[26.45]
Binions v. Evans [1972] Ch 359, CA.........................................................[17.42] [19.56] [19.57] [19.59]
[19.76] [19.79] [19.80] [25.04] [25.20]
Binning v. Binning [1895] WN 116.............................................................................................[18.09]
Biondi v. Kirklington & Piccadilly Estates [1947] 2 All ER 59, Roxburgh J ...............................[25.14]
Birch v. Blagrave (1755) Amb 264, 27 ER 176 ..........................................................................[17.35]
Birch v. Ellames (1794) 2 Anst 427, 145 ER 924, Macdonald CB .............................................[28.18]
Bircham & Co v. Worrall Homes [2001] EWCA Civ 775, [2001] 3 EGLR 83 .................[24.07] [24.08]
Bird v. Boulter (1833) 4 B & Ad 443, 110 ER 522 .....................................................................[22.04]
Bird v. Syme-Thomson [1979] 1 WLR 440.................................................................................[15.24]
Birkbeck PBBS, Re [1913] 2 Ch 34, Neville J ............................................................................[27.03]
Birmingham & District Land Co & Allday, Re [1893] 1 Ch 342.......................................[34.17] [34.19]
Birmingham & District Land Co v. London & NW Rly (1888) 40 Ch D 268...............................[23.05]
Birmingham Citizens’ PBS v. Caunt [1962] Ch 883, Russell J ........................................[29.15] [30.23]
Birmingham Dudley & District Banking Co v. Ross (1888) 38 Ch D 295, CA ................[35.12][35.18]
Birmingham Midshires v. Sabherwal (2000) 80 P & CR 256,
CA ...............................................................................[13.19] [13.46] [13.47] [17.29] [19.61] [23.39]
Birnam Wood, The [1907] P 1, CA ............................................................................................[15.17]
Bishop of Bath’s case (1605) 6 Co Rep 34b, 77 ER 303.......................................[25.02] [25.07] [25.19]
Bishop v. Bonham [1988] 1 WLR 742, CA .....................................................................[29.36] [29.37]
Blackburn & District Benefit BS, Re, ex p Graham (1889) 42 Ch D 343, CA .............................[32.46]
Blackett v. Ridout [1915] 2 KB 415, CA ....................................................................................[10.23]
Blacklocks v. JB Developments (Godalming) [1982] Ch 183, Mervyn Davies
QC ...............................................................................[11.39] [11.40] [20.19] [22.30] [24.30] [30.55]
Blackwood v. London Chartered Bank of Australia (1874) LR 5 PC 92 .....................................[15.08]
Blades v. Higgs (1865) 11 HLC 621, 11 ER 1474 ........................................................................[2.35]
Blake & Lyons v. Lewis Berger & Sons [1951] 2 TLR 605..........................................................[36.30]
Blake, Re (1885) 29 Ch D 913, CA............................................................................................[19.17]
Blamires v. Bradford Corp [1964] Ch 585 ................................................[21.13] [21.34][24.06][25.03]
Bland v. Ingram’s Estates (No 1) [2001] Ch 767 (No 2) [2001] EWCA Civ 1088,
[2002] 1 All ER 264 ............................................[2.27] [26.38] [26.42] [26.45] [26.46] [28.20] [29.15]
Bland v. Mosely (1587) 9 Co Rep 58a, 77 ER 817 .....................................................................[32.33]
Blandy Jenkins Estate, Re [1917] 1 Ch 46 .................................................................................[14.06]
Blane v. Francis [1917] 1 KB 252, CA .......................................................................................[27.31]
Blenheim Estates v. Ladbroke Retail Parks [1993] 4 All ER 157 ..............................................[20.01]
Blenheim Leisure (Restaurants), Re [2000] BCC 554, CA.........................................................[27.46]
Bligh v. Martin [1968] 1 WLR 804, Pennycuick J......................................................................[10.15]
Bliss, Re [2001] 1 WLR 1973, Ferris J ......................................................................................[19.58]
Blockbuster Entertainments v. Leakcliff Properties [1997] 1 EGLR 28 ..........................[27.09] [27.12]
Bloye’s T, Re (1849) 1 Mac & G 488, 41 ER 1354; on appeal Lewis v. Hillman
(1852) 3 HLC 607, 10 ER 239 ..................................................................................[29.37] [29.38]
Blundell v. Catterall (1821) 5 B & Ald 267, 106 ER 1190 ..........................................................[31.15]
Blunden v. Frogmore Investments [2002] EWCA Civ 573, [2002] 2 EGLR 29 ...........................[25.15]
Bocardo v. S & M Properties [1980] 1 WLR 17, CA .................................................................[27.14]
Boland see Williams & Glyn’s Bank ....................................................................................................
Boldack v. East Lindsey DC (1999) 31 HLR 41, CA .................................................................[26.22]
Bolton BS v. Cobb [1966] 1 WLR 1 ..........................................................................................[30.35]
Bolton v. Bolton (1879) 11 Ch D 968, Fry J ........................................................[35.15] [35.17] [35.21]
Bolton v. Buckenham [1891] 1 QB 278, CA ...............................................................................[29.01]
Bond v. Nottingham Corp [1940] Ch 429 ...................................................................................[32.32]
Bond’s Estate, Re (1904) 48 SJ 192.............................................................................................[19.55]
Bone v. Bone [1992] EGCS 81, CA ...........................................................................................[19.73]
Bonner v. Tottenham & Edmonton PIBS [1899] 1 QB 161, CA ..................................................[27.62]
Booker v. Palmer [1942] 2 All ER 674, CA.........................................................[19.62] [19.67] [25.84]
Boosey v. Davis (1988) 55 P & CR 83, CA ....................................................................[10.06] [10.14]
Booth v. Alcock (1873) LR 8 Ch App 663 .................................................................................[35.17]
Booth v. Smith (1884) 14 QBD 318, CA ...................................................................................[32.59]
Booth v. Turle (1873) LR 16 Eq 182..........................................................................................[19.80]
Boots the Chemist v. Street [1983] 2 EGLR 51 .........................................................................[16. 24]
Borman v. Griffith [1930] 1 Ch 493, Maugham J ....................................[25.16] [25.32] [35.07] [35.09]
[35.10] [35.16] [35.17] [35.18]
Borthwick-Norton v. Romney Warwick Estates [1950] 1 All ER 798, CA ..................................[26.45]
Boscawen v. Bajwa [1996] 1 WLR 328, CA ...............................................................................[29.34]
Bosomworth v. Faber (1992) 69 P & CR 288, CA ..........................................................[34.08] [36.10]
Boston’s WT, Re [1956] Ch 395.................................................................................................[19.17]
Boswell v. Crucible Steel Co [1925] 1 KB 119, CA .....................................................................[2.20]
Botham v. TSB Bank (1997) 73 P & CR D1, CA .............................................................[2.25] [29.20]
Bothe v. Amos [1976] Fam 46, CA ............................................................................................[24.17]
Botting v. Martin (1808) 1 Camp 317, 170 ER 970 ........................................................[25.23] [25.24]
Boustany v. Pigott (1995) 69 P & CR 298, PC ...............................................................[30.45] [30.70]
Bovill v. Endle [1896] 1 Ch 648, Kekewich J...................................................................[29.01] [29.46]
Bowe v. Trustee of Bowe [1998] 2 FLR 439 ..............................................................................[19.26]
Bowen v. Edwards (1661) 1 Rep Ch 221, 21 ER 555..................................................................[29.10]
Bowes v. East London Waterworks Co (1821) Jacob 324, 37 ER 873, Lord Eldon ...................[25.27]
Bowle v. Davis (1889) 44 Ch D 110 ..........................................................................................[36.41]
Bowmakers v. Barnet Instruments [1945] KB 65, CA.................................................................[17.33]
Bowring Services v. Scottish Widows’ Fund & Life Assurance Society
[1995] 1 EGLR 158 ...................................................................................................[36.31] [36.32]
Box Hill Common, Re [1980] Ch 109, CA ................................................................................[36.40]
Boxbusher Properties v. Graham [1976] 2 EGLR 58 ......................................................[23.06] [23.17]
Boxhead Common, Re (1977) 33 P & CR 451............................................................................[35.12]
Boyd v. Sharrock (1867) LR 5 Eq 72 .................................................................................[2.23] [2.25]
Boydell v. Gillespie (1970) 216 EG 1505 ....................................................................................[19.26]
Boydell v. McMichael (1834) 1 Cr M & R 177, 149 ER 1043 ....................................................[29.20]
Boyer v. Warbey [1953] 1 QB 234, CA ..........................................................................[27.31] [27.40]
Boyer’s SE, Re [1916] 2 Ch 404.................................................................................................[19.58]
Boyle v. Tamlyn (1827) 6 B & C 329, 108 ER 473, Bayley J ......................................................[36.27]
Boyle’s Claim, Re [1961] 1 WLR 339, Wilberforce J...........................................[11.37] [15.50] [15.51]
BP Exploration Company (Libya) v. Hunt [1979] 1 WLR 783; on appeal
[1983] 2 AC 352, HL.............................................................................................................[23.05]
BP Properties v. Buckler (1987) 55 P & CR 337, CA .........................................[10.05] [10.09] [10.13],
[10.15] [10.17] [10.19] [11.15]
Bracewell v. Appleby [1975] Ch 408, Graham J .........................................................................[34.03]
Brackenbank Lodge v. Peart (1994) 67 P & CR 249 257–258, Russell LJ ................................[16. 24]
Bradburn v. Morris (1896) 3 Ch D 812 .....................................................................................[36.04]
Bradford & Bingley BS v. Chandock (1996) 72 P & CR D28, CA...................................[30.24] [30.71]
Bradford Banking Co v. Henry Briggs Son & Co (1886) 12 App Cas 29, HL .............................[29.07]
Bradford Old Bank v. Sutcliffe [1918] 2 KB 833, CA.................................................................[29.04]
Bradley Clare Estate’s Applic, Re (1988) 55 P & CR 126, L Tr ................................................[34.43]
Bradley v. Carritt [1903] AC 253, HL ............................................................................[29.12] [29.13]
Bradley v. Peixoto (1797) 3 Ves 324, 30 ER 1034........................................................................[3.28]
Bradshaw v. Davey [1952] 1 All ER 350 ......................................................................................[2.22]
Bradshaw v. Pawley [1980] 1 WLR 10.......................................................................................[25.06]
Braithwaite v. Winwood [1960] 1 WLR 1257 ......................................................[29.15] [29.21] [30.34]
Brandon v. Brandon (1862) 10 WR 287 ..........................................................................[29.17] [30.13]
Brann v. Westminster Anglo-Continental Investment Co [1976] 2 EGLR 72, CA.......................[27.12]
Braymist v. Wise Finance Co [2002] EWCA Civ 127, [2002] 2 All ER 333 ..................................[7.25]
Breams Property Investment Co v. Stroulger [1948] 2 KB 1,
CA....................................................................[25.14] [25.22] [25.26] [27.27] [27.31] [27.39] [27.40]
Bremner, Re [1999] 1 FLR 912, Ch D .......................................................................................[19.26]
Brennan v. Lambeth LBC (1998) 30 HLR 481, CA........................................................[25.78] [25.85]
Brent LBC v. Charles (1997) 29 HLR 876, CA ........................................................................[25.86]
Brent LBC v. Cronin (1997) 30 HLR 43, CA ............................................................... [25.73] [27.02]
Brent LBC v. O’Bryan [1993] 1 EGLR 59, CA .............................................................[25.82] [25.85]
Brereton v. Edwards (1888) 21 QBD 488, CA ...........................................................................[28.40]
Brett v. Clowser (1880) 5 CPD 376, Denman J ........................................................................[32.21]
Brew Brothers v. Snax (Ross) [1970] 1 QB 612, CA .................................................................[26.15]
Brewer v. Square [1892] 2 Ch 111 ..................................................................................[29.31] [29.32]
Brewers of City of London (Master of) v. Att-Gen [2000] ELR 117, Ch D................................[14.28]
Bridewell Hospital v. Ward Lock Bawden (1892) 62 LJ Ch 270 .................................................[36.18]
Bridger v. Rice (1819) 1 Jac & W 74, 37 ER 303 .......................................................................[13.52]
Bridges v. Harrow LBC [1981] 1 EGLR 143, Stuart-Smith J .........................................[16.24] [34.25]
Bridges v. Hawkesworth (1851) 21 LJQB 75................................................................................[2.30]
Bridges v. Mees [1957] Ch 475, Harman J.................................................[8.21] [10.12] [10.52] [11.15]
[11.17] [11.24] [11.40] [11.50] [20.19]
Bridges v. Stanford [1991] 2 EGLR 265, CA .............................................................................[25.15]
Bridgman v. Green (1755) 2 Ves Sen 627, 28 ER 399, Hardwicke LC........................................[30.54]
Bridle v. Ruby [1989] QB 169, CA ......................................................................[35.03] [36.03] [36.10]
Briggs v. McCusker [1996] 2 EGLR 197, Ch D.........................................................................[32.40]
Briggs v. Rowan [1991] EGCS 6 ....................................................................................[17.12] [17.15]
Bright v. Campbell (1885) 54 LJ Ch 1077, CA ..........................................................................[29.17]
Bright v. Campbell (1889) 41 Ch D 388, Kay J..........................................................................[29.02]
Bright v. Walker (1834) 1 Cr M & R 211, 149 ER 1054, Parke B ..........[36.03] [36.07] [36.20] [36.21]
Brighty v. Norton (1862) 3 B & S 305, 122 ER 116 ...................................................................[29.04]
Brikom Investments v. Carr [1979] QB 467, CA ................[23.05] [23.12] [23.19] [23.25] [23.29] [23.38]
Brikom Investments v. Seaford [1981] 1 WLR 863, CA ............................................................[26.17]
Brillouet v. Landless (1996) 28 HLR 836, CA ...............................................................[25.71] [25.76]
Brinnard v. Ewens (1987) 19 HLR 415, CA ........................................................[23.07] [23.21] [23.29]
Bristol & West BS v. Brandon [1995] Times March 9th, Colman J ...........................................[20.05]
Bristol & West BS v. Ellis (1997) 29 HLR 282, CA........................................................[30.23] [30.24]
Bristol & West BS v. Henning [1985] 1 WLR 778, CA ..............................................................[15.54]
Bristol & West BS v. May May & Merrimans (No 2) [1998] 1 WLR 336, Chadwick J .............[29.34]
Bristol & West v. Bartlett [2002] EWCA Civ 1181, [2002] Times September 9th ...........[10.35] [29.35]
Bristol Cars v. RKH (Hotels) (1978) 38 P & CR 411, CA .............................................[23.05] [23.27]
Bristol Corp v. Virgin [1978] 2 KB 622 ......................................................................................[28.37]
Britain v. Rossiter (1879) 11 QBD 123, CA...............................................................................[22.13]
Britannia BS v. Earl [1990] 1 WLR 422, CA .............................................................................[30.35]
Britannia BS v. Pugh (1997) 29 HLR 423, CA .........................................................................[30.61]
Britannia BS v. Rivett (1997) 29 HLR 893, CA ........................................................................[30.49]
Britel Developments (Thatcham) v. Nightfreight (GB) [1998] 4 All ER 432, Ch D ..................[34.03]
Britford Common, Re [1977] 1 WLR 39 ....................................................................................[36.40]
British & Commonwealth Holdings, Re (No 3) [1992] 1 WLR 672 ..............................................[6.22]
British American Cattle Co v. Caribe Farm Industries [1998] 1 WLR 1529, PC .........................[11.01]
British Anzani (Felixstowe) v. International Marine Management (UK) [1980]
QB 137, Forbes J..................................................................................................................[26.10]
British Bakeries v. Thorbourne Retail Parks [1991], Ch D .........................................................[22.27]
British Economical Lamp Co v. Empire, Mile End (1913) 29 TLR 386 ..............................[2.19] [2.25]
British General Insurance Co v. Att-Gen [1945] LJ NCCR 113 ........................................[3.47] [32.46]
British Maritime Trust v. Upsons [1931] WN 7, Clauson J ..........................................................[9.27]
British Petroleum Pension Trust v. Behrendt [1985] 2 EGLR 97, CA ........................................[26.45]
British Railways Board v. Bodywright (1971) 220 EG 651 .............................................[25.13] [25.82]
British Railways Board v. GJ Holdings (1974) 230 EG 973, CA................................................[10.12]
British Railways Board v. Glass [1965] Ch 538, CA ...................................................................[36.04]
British Railways Board v. Pickin [1974] AC 765, HL.................................................................[14.31]
British Telecommunications v. Sun Life Assurance Society [1995] 4 All ER 44, CA ..................[26.25]
British Waterways Board v. London Power Networks [2002] EWHC 2417,
[2003] 1 All ER 187 ....................................................................................................[2.17] [32.10]
Brockbank, Re [1948] Ch 206, Vaisey J .....................................................................................[12.17]
Brocket Hall (Jersey) v. Clague [1998] CLYB 4367 .................................................................[23.41]
Brocklebank v. Thompson [1903] 2 Ch 344 ................................................................................[36.48]
Brocklesby v. Temperance PBS [1895] AC 173, HL ..................................................................[28.23]
Bromley Park Gardens Estates v. Moss [1982] 1 WLR 1019, CA .............................................[27.13]
Bromor Properties’ Applic, Re (1995) 70 P & CR 569................................................................[34.43]
Brooker SE v. Ayers (1987) 54 P & CR 165, CA .......................................................................[25.73]
Brooker v. Drysdale (1877) 3 CPD 52, 57–58 ............................................................................[33.07]
Brooker, Re [1934] Ch 610, Eve J ..............................................................................................[16.47]
Broomfield v. Williams [1897] 1 Ch 602, CA............................................[35.12] [35.18] [35.26] [36.29]
Brouard v. Dumaresque (1841) 3 Moo PC 457, 13 ER 186 ........................................................[29.37]
Brown & Root Technology v. Sun Alliance & London Assurance Co
[2001] Ch 733, CA .............................................................................................[7.22] [8.43] [24.03]
Brown v. Alabaster (1887) 37 Ch D 490, Kay J...................................................[35.09] [35.10] [35.21]
Brown v. Brown [1959] P 86, CA ...............................................................................................[13.42]
Brown v. Burdett (1882) 21 Ch D 667 .......................................................................................[35.24]
Brown v. Cole (1845) 14 Sim 427, 60 ER 424 ............................................................................[29.01]
Brown v. Dale (1878) 9 Ch D 78................................................................................................[16.22]
Brown v. Gould [1972] Ch 53, Megarry J .................................................................................[24.08]
Brown v. Heathlands Mental Health NHS Trust [1996] 1 All ER 133 .......................................[32.40]
Brown v. Inskip (1884) 1 Cab & El 231......................................................................................[34.18]
Brown v. Liverpool Corp [1969] 3 All ER 1345, CA ..................................................................[26.18]
Brown v. Oakshot (1857) 24 Beav 254, 53 ER 355..........................................................[16.17] [16.46]
Brown v. Peto [1900] 1 QB 346, Bigham J; [1900] 2 QB 653, CA .......................[25.23] [29.19] [30.35]
Brown v. Raindle (1796) 3 Ves 256, 30 ER 998 ..........................................................................[16.44]
Brown, Re (1886) 32 Ch D 597, Kay J ......................................................................................[13.12]
Brown, Re [1954] Ch 39, Harman J ............................................................................................[3.28]
Browne v. Flower [1911] 1 Ch 219, 227, Parker J.......................................................................[35.28]
Browne v. Lockhart (1840) 10 Sim 420, 59 ER 678 ...................................................................[29.46]
Browne v. Perry (1991) 64 P & CR 228, PC ..............................................................................[10.15]
Browne v. Warner (1808) 14 Ves 156, 33 ER 480.......................................................................[25.20]
Browning v. Handiland Group (1976) 35 P & CR 345 ...............................................................[28.22]
Brown’s Estate, Re [1893] 2 Ch 504 ...........................................................................................[29.04]
BRS Northern v. Templeheights [1998] 2 EGLR 182, Neuberger J ....