Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 01:32

From: Barry Allan

Subject: Contrasting the practice of precedent US v Commonwealth

Chaim Saiman wrote:

I am looking for parings of cases (preferably contract/restitution/tort cases) that display these differences well, or even UK/Commonwealth that reason in this fashion.

Lord Denning in Staffs Health Authority v Staffs Waterworks [1978] 1 WLR 1387 was not disposed to apply the golden rule of construction laid down in Grey v. Pearson simply because it was "quite out of date" (the context was an agreement to supply water at a particular fixed price “at all times hereafter”). On the same phrase, NZ and Canadian courts have been OK with leaving the words to have their normal meaning, and decide whether the intervening events were frustrating.

Barry

--
*****************************************
Barry Allan
Senior Lecturer
Faculty of Law
University of Otago
PO Box 56
Dunedin
New Zealand
phone: ++(64) (03) 479 8830.  fax:(03) 479 8855

<<<< Previous Message  ~  Index  ~  Next Message >>>>>