British Ruling Cases from Courts of Great Britain, Canada, Ireland, Australia and Other Divisions of the British Empire (Volume 1) (Paperback)


This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1911. Excerpt: ... that Kaye would probably do on this occasion what he had clearly done on others, and in the cases when he did so there would be a larceny committed by both, though in the other cases, when the stuff was correctly weighed, there would be none. On these points I find no difficulty; but in the case as originally stated there was nothing to show whether the whole transaction of the sale of the casters' ashes was carried through by Kaye, or whether the limited company, by any other officer or agent, made a contract for the sale. Phillimore, J.: I entirely agree. Conviction affirmed. Solicitors for the Crown: Parish & Company, Birmingham. Solicitors for prisoner: Ford & Ford, for A. J. O'Connor, Birmingham. Note.--Larceny by taking away greater quantity of purchased article than was paid for. Although an extensive search has failed to bring to light any cases containing the same combination of circumstances which gave rise to the questions decided in R. v. Tideswell, there are some which may be of interest in connection with it. One of these is R. v. Bramley (1861) 8 Cox, C. C. 468. 7 Jur. N. S. 473, 9 Week. Rep. 555, Leigh & C. C. C. 21, 4 L. T. N. S. 309, where a person who, after having his cart filled at a coal yard with a load of soft coal, covered the top over with slack, so that, upon its being weighed, he was required to pay for it only the price of a load of slack, which was much less than what he would have paid for soft coal, was held to be guilty of larceny of the soft coal. Another is Kirk v. Garrett (1896) 84 Md. 383, 35 Atl. 1089, in which it was held that an employee of a silversmith, who carried away manufactured goods upon leaving with a fellow workman, in their place and stead, raw material equal in weight, but not the equivalent in value, wa...

R1,332

Or split into 4x interest-free payments of 25% on orders over R50
Learn more

Discovery Miles13320
Mobicred@R125pm x 12* Mobicred Info
Free Delivery
Delivery AdviceOut of stock

Toggle WishListAdd to wish list
Review this Item

Product Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1911. Excerpt: ... that Kaye would probably do on this occasion what he had clearly done on others, and in the cases when he did so there would be a larceny committed by both, though in the other cases, when the stuff was correctly weighed, there would be none. On these points I find no difficulty; but in the case as originally stated there was nothing to show whether the whole transaction of the sale of the casters' ashes was carried through by Kaye, or whether the limited company, by any other officer or agent, made a contract for the sale. Phillimore, J.: I entirely agree. Conviction affirmed. Solicitors for the Crown: Parish & Company, Birmingham. Solicitors for prisoner: Ford & Ford, for A. J. O'Connor, Birmingham. Note.--Larceny by taking away greater quantity of purchased article than was paid for. Although an extensive search has failed to bring to light any cases containing the same combination of circumstances which gave rise to the questions decided in R. v. Tideswell, there are some which may be of interest in connection with it. One of these is R. v. Bramley (1861) 8 Cox, C. C. 468. 7 Jur. N. S. 473, 9 Week. Rep. 555, Leigh & C. C. C. 21, 4 L. T. N. S. 309, where a person who, after having his cart filled at a coal yard with a load of soft coal, covered the top over with slack, so that, upon its being weighed, he was required to pay for it only the price of a load of slack, which was much less than what he would have paid for soft coal, was held to be guilty of larceny of the soft coal. Another is Kirk v. Garrett (1896) 84 Md. 383, 35 Atl. 1089, in which it was held that an employee of a silversmith, who carried away manufactured goods upon leaving with a fellow workman, in their place and stead, raw material equal in weight, but not the equivalent in value, wa...

Customer Reviews

No reviews or ratings yet - be the first to create one!

Product Details

General

Imprint

General Books LLC

Country of origin

United States

Release date

2012

Availability

Supplier out of stock. If you add this item to your wish list we will let you know when it becomes available.

First published

2012

Authors

Dimensions

246 x 189 x 22mm (L x W x T)

Format

Paperback - Trade

Pages

424

ISBN-13

978-1-153-84998-2

Barcode

9781153849982

Categories

LSN

1-153-84998-4



Trending On Loot