![]() |
||
Links: Home | swarblaw - law discussions |
swarb.co.uk - law indexThese cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases. Â |
|
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
Evidence - From: 1991 To: 1991This page lists 6 cases, and was prepared on 21 May 2019. ÂBrowne v Perry [1991] WLR 1297 1991 PC Lord Templeman Land, Limitation, Evidence Any acknowledgement of title must be in writing. Lord Templeman explained the rule against relience upon oral acknowledgements in adverse possession cases: "If an oral acknowledgment were allowed to constitute an interruption litigation would be encouraged and litigants would dispute what was said, by whom and to whom . . Once an acknowledgment has been reduced to writing, there is certainty about the words used and the court need only decide whether the words which have been written amount to an acknowledgment. There is no room for fraud, mistake or failure of memory. The written word speaks for itself." Limitation Act 1980 S1 1 Citers   Ventouris v Mountain; CA 1991 - [1991] 1 WLR 607; [1991] 3 All ER 472   Regina v Inland Revenue Commissioners, Ex parte T C Coombs and Co; HL 1991 - [1991] 2 AC 283; [1991] 2 WLR 682; [1991] 3 All ER 623  The "Filiatra Legacy" [1991] 2 Lloyds Reports 337 1991 Mustill LJ Evidence The plaintiff had put in evidence under the Civil Evidence Act a statement by a surveyor that he had checked certain cargo tanks to ensure they were empty. At a late stage in the trial the plaintiff sought to say that he had not done so in direct contradiction to the evidence which they had called. Held: After considering how far the common law prohibited a party from asserting that evidence given in chief by a witness he has called is untruthful and the provisions of the Act, “In these circumstances we do not find in the case law or the legislation anything which requires us to hold that the judge had no power to treat the evidence of Captain Bellucci as otherwise than true; and not being so required, we are not ourselves willing to go so far. "  Re R (A Minor) (Expert's Evidence) [1991] 1 FLR 291 1991 FD Children, Evidence The court gave guidance on the principles to be followed by experts providing evidence in children cases. 1 Citers   Hui Chi-ming v The Queen; PC 5-Aug-1991 - [1992] 1 AC 34; [1991] 3 All ER 897; [1991] 3 WLR 495; Gazette, 02 October 1992; [1991] UKPC 29; [1991] UKPC 29; (1991) 94 Cr App R 236  |
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG. |