Logged out
Access All our Essays in an Instant
Swap your work for FREE access, or pay £4.99 for instant access
In your own words summarise the views of Fenton Atkinson and Salmon L and state, with reasons, which you prefer. You do not need to deal with the judgement of Danckwerts .
Member rating: No Rating | Words: | Submitted: Wed Oct 20 2004
Page Preview
On the left is an image preview of every page of this document, and below are the first 150 words with formatting removed:
In the case of Jones v Padavatton (1969) 2 All ER the Court of Appeal decided that there was no legally binding contract. Although the decision was unanimous the three Court of Appeal judges did not all give the same reasons. In your own words summarise the views of Fenton Atkinson and Salmon L and state, with reasons, which you prefer. You do not need to deal with the judgement of Danckwerts . Citation: Jones v Padavatton (1969) 2 ALL ER 616 - Electronic Version. The judges were deciding an appeal by the mother, Violet Lalgee Jones. By way of case stated from Clerkenwell County Court, on grounds: 1. the judge misdirected himself in holding that there had been intentions of legal relations between the two parties. 2. The judge misdirected himself in holding that that agreement was not void for uncertainty. 3. The judge's conclusions were not supported by evidence. 4....
Get instant access
- Instant, unlimited access to our documents in full
- Swap your work for free access, or pay £4.99
- To see the full version of this document and 149,374 others
