Orr v Ford

JurisdictionAustralia Federal only
Neutral Citation1989-0208 HCA A,[1989] HCA 4
Year1989
Date1989
CourtHigh Court

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
91 cases
1 firm's commentaries
  • Inside track: Property & Real Estate - In the media and recent cases
    • Australia
    • Mondaq Australia
    • 12 December 2019
    ...the property, or is otherwise barred from relief - Limitations of Action Act 1958 (Vic) ss 5, 11 and 21 - Doctrine of laches - Orr v Ford [1989] HCA 4; (1989) 167 CLR 316 - CSR Ltd v Amaca Pty Ltd [2016] VSCA 320 - waiver of rights to bring claim - RW Health Partnership Pty Ltd v Lendlease ......
3 books & journal articles
  • Equity, Trust and Restitution
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Annual Review No. 2001, December 2001
    • 1 December 2001
    ...is an equitable doctrine and De Beers” claim was grounded in common law. As the High Court of Australia forcefully said in Orr v Ford(1989) 167 CLR 316 at 340: “Laches … is not available in answer to a legal claim” (see also McGhee, Snell”s Equity (30th Ed, 2000) at p 33). The orthodox posi......
  • Equity and Trust
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Annual Review No. 2002, December 2002
    • 1 December 2002
    ...affect an action at law when an equity is raised through estoppel, laches “is not available in answer to a legal claim” (see Orr v Ford(1989) 167 CLR 316 at 340). This is because, in the former instance, equity is being employed, through the doctrine of estoppel, to restrain the enforcement......
  • Back to the future: retrogression and the High Court's decision in Byrnes v. Kendle.
    • Australia
    • University of Western Sydney Law Review No. 15, January 2011
    • 1 January 2011
    ...defining the terms, in an attempt to impose some degree of semantic precision and intelligibility upon the amorphous terminology. (65) (1989) 167 CLR 316. (66) (67) Ibid. (68) Ibid. (69) Ibid. LUDMILLA ROBINSON, BA (Hons), Dip Ed, Dip Law, PhD, SJD, Barrister and Lecturer in Equity and Trus......