The Attorney-General v The Wexford Harbour Embankment Company and Others
Jurisdiction | Ireland |
Judgment Date | 20 April 1875 |
Date | 20 April 1875 |
Court | Court of Appeal in Chancery (Ireland) |
Ch. App.
Byrne v. Byrne 2 Dr. & War. 71.
Tor.. IX.] EQUITY SPATE& 607 "THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL v. THE WEXFORD HAR- Ch. App. BOUR EMBANKMENT COMPANY AND OTHERS. 1875. April 19, 20. APPEAL by John Woodward Stanford, one of the Defendants, from the decision of the Master of the Rolls, reported ante, pp. 111-134. Mr. May, Q. C., Mr. Tandy, Q. C., and Mr. William Anderson, for the Appellant. Mr. Jellett, Q. C., Mr. P. White, Q. C., and Mr. Naish, for the Respondents the Relators. Mr. E. G. Swifte, for the Respondent the Attorney-General. The only case referred to, not mentioned in the report below, -was that of Byrne v. Byrne (1), cited on behalf of the Relators as to the original jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery not being 'ousted except by express words. THEIR LORDSHIPS affirmed the decree of the Master of the Rolls, and dismissed the appeal with costs. Solicitors for the Appellant : Messrs. Nunn 4. Jones. Solicitor for the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Kelly v Breen
...made by the solicitors is underlined in the frequently quoted passage from the Judgment of Sullivan M.R. in Rob .v. O'Connor ( 1875 Irish Reports 9 Equity 373 in which at page 380 of the report he says:- "The principle which I think should be acted on and I am prepared to enforce is this, t......