Johnston v O'Neill

JurisdictionIreland
Year1911
Date1911
CourtHouse of Lords (Ireland)

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform

  • Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions

  • Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms

  • Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

vLex
31 cases
  • Max Couper and Another v Albion Properties Ltd and Others
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 8 October 2013
    ...is based on the decisions of the House of Lords in Bristow v Cormican (1878) 3 App Cas 641, Malcolmson v O'Dea (1863) LR 10 HL 592 and Johnston v O'Neill [1911] AC 552. Counsel for APL submitted that these decisions (and that in Dysart v Hammerton) made it clear that, where there is a dispu......
  • Wallis's Cayton Bay Holiday Camp Ltd v Shell-Mex and B.P. Ltd
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 10 July 1974
    ...to he taken into account in determining the sufficiency of a possession". This passage was cited with approval by Lord Macnaghten in Johnson v. O'Neil (1911) A.C. 583 and by Lord Shaw in Kirley v. Cowderov (1912) A.C. 599. 60 In my judgment, when the land in question is being held primarily......
  • Mabo v State of Queensland (No2)
    • Australia
    • High Court
    • 3 June 1992
    ...Stanford v HurlstoneELR (1873) LR 9 Ch App 116 657. Lord Advocate v Lord LovatELR (1880) 5 App Cas 273, at 288; Johnston v O'NeillELR [1911] AC 552, at 583; Kirby v CowderoyELR [1912] AC 599, at 602–3 658. McNeil, pp 196–204 659. See for instance Lands Acquisition Act 1989 (Cth), Pt VII; La......
  • Lettsome v Lettsome
    • British Virgin Islands
    • High Court (British Virgin Islands)
    • 14 March 1997
    ...in determining the sufficiency of possession.’ 54 This passage was cited with approval by Lord Macnaghten in ( Johnston v. O'Neill [1911] Ac 552 at 538 and Lord Shaw in Kirby v. Cowderoy [1912] AC 599 at 603). In my judgment, when the land in question is being held primarily for its develop......
  • Get Started for Free