Voli v Inglewood Shire Council

JurisdictionAustralia Federal only
Judgment Date1963
Neutral Citation[1963] HCA 15,1963-0529 HCA A
Date1963
CourtHigh Court
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
89 cases
  • Hawkins v Clayton
    • Australia
    • High Court
    • Invalid date
  • Lok Kok Beng v Loh Chiak Eong and Another
    • Malaysia
    • Federal Court (Malaysia)
    • Invalid date
  • Anns v Merton London Borough Council
    • United Kingdom
    • House of Lords
    • 12 May 1977
    ...cases as arise between contracting parties, when the terms of the contract have to be considered (see Voli v. Inglewood Shire Council 110 C.L.R. 74, 85, per Windeyer J.), I am unable to understand why this principle or proposition should prevent recovery in a suitable case by a person, who ......
  • Anns v Merton London Borough Council
    • United Kingdom
    • House of Lords
    • 12 May 1977
    ...... arise between contracting parties, when the terms of the contract have to be considered (see Voli v. Inglewood Shire Council 110 C.L.R. 74, 85 , per Windeyer J.), I am unable to understand why ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 firm's commentaries
5 books & journal articles
  • The 2017 Winterton Lecture. Sir Owen Dixon Today
    • Australia
    • University of Western Australia Law Review No. 43-1, January 2018
    • 1 January 2018
    ...100, 103; (1942) 16 Australian Law Journal 192, 194. 36 (1933) 50 CLR 387; [1933] HCA 35. 37 [1932] AC 562. 38 (1963) 110 CLR 74, 79–80; [1963] HCA 15. 39 Stone, Legal Systems and Lawyers’ Reasonings (1964) 258-60. See also Edelman, ‘Fundamental Errors in Donoghue v Stevenson’ (2014) 39 Aus......
  • The site
    • United Kingdom
    • Construction Law. Volume II - Third Edition
    • 13 April 2020
    ...arranged for the construction of the line. 458 (1848) 2 Exch 251 at 255 [154 Er 485 at 487]. See also Voli v Inglewood Shire Council (1963) 110 CLr 74 at 95–96, per Windeyer J. For the position under New York law see Bennett, “Legal implications of the assignment of a construction contract ......
  • Contract formation
    • United Kingdom
    • Construction Law. Volume I - Third Edition
    • 13 April 2020
    ...See paragraph 2.115. 28 See paragraph 2.117f. 29 he duty of care concept is discussed in Chapter 10. in Voli v Inglewood Shire Council (1963) 110 CLr 74, Windeyer J noted (at 93): “he shadow that the requirement of privity of contract in the law of contract has cast upon the law of tort is ......
  • Statutory regulation of work
    • United Kingdom
    • Construction Law. Volume III - Third Edition
    • 13 April 2020
    ...in the European Economic Area “EEA”) 217 are, subject to limited exceptions, required to comply with 210 Voli v Inglewood Shire Council (1963) 110 CLR 74 at 86, per Windeyer J. 211 Cf Kaliszewska v John Clague & Partners (1984) 5 Con LR 62 at 77, per Judge White QC. 212 Burnley Engineering ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT