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 405 of 469

  • Promises to Perform an Existing Duty

  • A. G. Davis
  • Journal:
    The Cambridge Law Journal / Volume 6 / Issue 2 / July 1937
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    16 January 2009, pp. 202-216
    Print publication:
    July 1937

  • In December, 1934, the ex-Lord Chancellor asked the Law Revision Committee ‘to consider and report whether and, if so, in what respects the doctrine of consideration requires modification, and in particular to consider among other aspects of and observations upon that doctrine … (b) The rule that a promise to perform an existing duty is no consideration’.

  • Public Meetings and Processions

  • A. L. Goodhart
  • Journal:
    The Cambridge Law Journal / Volume 6 / Issue 2 / July 1937
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    16 January 2009, pp. 161-174
    Print publication:
    July 1937

  • The events which gave rise to the Public Order Act, 1936,1 and the debates in Parliament2 on that subject have drawn attention to the uncertainty concerning the law of public meetings and processions. This uncertainty is due in part to the fact that there is only a limited number of cases directly in point, some of which have not been reported in a satisfactory manner, and in part to an over-simplification in the books of what is an exceedingly complicated matter.

  • Common Law Misdemeanors

  • R. M. Jackson
  • Journal:
    The Cambridge Law Journal / Volume 6 / Issue 2 / July 1937
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    16 January 2009, pp. 193-201
    Print publication:
    July 1937

  • The recognition of the misdemeanor of Public Mischief has raised the whole issue of whether it is desirable that the judiciary should be in a position to extend the criminal law. The abortive Draft Criminal Code, section 5, provided that all offences should be prosecuted either under the Code or under some other statute, and not at common law. Fitzjames Stephen strongly supported this proposal. The opposing view is that no legislation can foresee all the mischievous acts that may occur, and that it is therefore undesirable to take away from the judges their power of extending common law offences. Any full discussion of this problem requires some consideration of the part played by the judges in building up our criminal law. The purpose of this paper is to examine the main lines of judicial activity in this field.

Page 405 of 469