Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
  1. Home
  2. Journals
  3. The Cambridge Law Journal
  4. Content listing
Journal Home

Refine listing

Refine listing

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals: Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies: Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

9363 results in The Cambridge Law Journal

Page 230 of 469

  • CLJ volume 41 issue 2 Cover and Back matter

  • Journal:
    The Cambridge Law Journal / Volume 41 / Issue 2 / November 1982
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    16 January 2009, pp. b1-b12
    Print publication:
    November 1982
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation

  • Covenants, Privity of Contract, and the Purchaser of Personal Property

  • Andrew Tettenborn
  • Journal:
    The Cambridge Law Journal / Volume 41 / Issue 1 / April 1982
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    16 January 2009, pp. 58-86
    Print publication:
    April 1982

  • This article discusses an old but vexed question in the law of obligations: to what extent can a purchaser of personal property find himself bound to observe covenants relating to that property to which he was not party? Put shortly, how far can covenants bind personal property?

    This question can, of course, arise in many guises. The issue may be whether a purchaser of shares in a private company is bound by a right of pre-emption in respect of those shares held by other shareholders in the same company; whether the seller of goods can impose restrictions on the price at which remote purchasers may resell those goods; whether the mortgagee of a ship can be prevented from using the vessel inconsistently with the rights of one who has booked space in her: issues whose sheer diversity makes it most difficult to achieve the aim in this article of developing general principles in this area of the law.

  • Assumpsit and Debt in the Early Sixteenth Century: The Origins of the Indebitatus Count

  • David Ibbetson
  • Journal:
    The Cambridge Law Journal / Volume 41 / Issue 1 / April 1982
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    16 January 2009, pp. 142-161
    Print publication:
    April 1982

  • One of the more intriguing mysteries raised by the action of assump sit in the sixteenth century is that of the Indebitatus count. We know that the most common form of declaration in assumpsit by the middle of the sixteenth century took this form: whereas the defendant had bought a cow from the plaintiff, the defendant promised to pay to the plaintiff £10. The sequence of tenses, from the pluperfect to the perfect, sometimes reinforced by perantea or postea indicates that the promise which constituted the cause of action had been made subsequently to the creation of the initial liability. In effect the cause of action was a promise to perform an existing duty. The same result could be achieved by using the strict Indebitatus count: the defendant, being indebted to the plaintiff in £10, promised to pay £10. The purpose of the present paper is to examine why this form of count developed, and how it was justified in terms of the newly-formulated ideas of consideration.

  • A Synthesis of the Mode of Termination of Contracts of Employment

  • John McMullen
  • Journal:
    The Cambridge Law Journal / Volume 41 / Issue 1 / April 1982
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    16 January 2009, pp. 110-141
    Print publication:
    April 1982

  • The contract of employment is still the basic structure in individual employment law. There is, however, much literature the argument of which is that the contract of employment is in many ways an unsuitable legal framework to govern individual workplace relations. In particular, the resolution of individual employment disputes would not, one might realistically imagine, be best achieved by the application of rigid contractual principles derived frequently from the resolution of commercial and other unrelated problems. In this vein it has been stated by Winn L.J. that:

Page 230 of 469