Results 1-5 of 100
Ciiirrr, J ., said that the question in issue was one of act, and all that he had to
consider was what was the fair inference to be drawn from the facts as admitted.
Had the German specifications been published in this country in_such_a way as
had to decide the question alone he should have formed ii different Judgment.
Far, L.J., said that there must be a strong case to Justify copies in more than one
language. The present decision would la! d°'nhP° general rule. It was permissible
CASES OF THE Vi/EEK. MOWATT v. CASTLE STEEL AND IRONWORKS CO.—
O. A. No. 2, 3rd November. COMPANY—DB1lBNTURBS—IN\'ALII) ISSUE-—
HOLDE1L sou \.'.iLUE \\'ITl-[OUT NOTICE—ESTOl'l'EL. In this case a question
45 For the present purpose rule 1 of order 55 of 1875 and rule 1 of order 65 ' I _ l
of 1883 were identical, and _the question was whether the rule enabled the court
to order costs to be paid by persons who, till the coming into operation of the ...
C0aa0iionATIO>'This was the further consideration of an administration action,
and the question arose whether a claim for £1,000 against the estate of the
testator could be admitted upon the iincorroborated evidence of _the claimant.
What people are saying - Write a review
Mr Vusumzi Msi , Barrister & Solicitor look at you as $ sign
very unprofessional unexperienced lawyer , he is beyond your imagination ,he shop around other lawyers to get an idea how much he can charge you , I will write complaint and if any one knows how I can find a lawyer to sue him please help me
this guy has no clue , he charge me 25 hours of his work and when I ask him small part of the case he doesn't know anything about it , he is unbelivable