Chisholm v. Doulton [1890] 22 QBD 736.

Case Name:- Chisholm v. Doulton Citation:- [1890] 22 QBD 736. Jurisdiction:- United Kingdom (UK) Judgment:- The judgment found that a master cannot be held criminally responsible for acts committed by a servant without the master’s knowledge or authorization, in accordance with the principle “Actus non facit reum, Nisi mens sit rea” (An act does not … Read more

Robinson vs. Davidson LR 6 Ex 269

Case Name:– Robinson vs. Davidson Citation:– LR 6 Ex 269 Jurisdiction:– Court of Exchequer Judgment Summary:– Historical Background:- Legal Framework in the 19th Century: During the 19th century, contract law was undergoing significant development, transitioning from a more rigid application of contractual obligations to a more nuanced understanding of implied conditions and fairness. The legal … Read more

Baily Vs. De Crespigny LR 4 QB 180 (185)

Case Name:– Baily Vs. De Crespigny Citation:– LR 4 QB 180 (185) Jurisdiction:– England and Wales (Queen’s Bench Division) Judgment:– The judgment discussed the principle that an “act of God” does not per se excuse a party’s breach of contract, emphasizing that the absence of contract terms addressing such unforeseen events determines whether non-performance is … Read more

Paradine vs. Jane (1647) Aleyn 26, 82 Eng. Rep. 897

Case Name: Paradine v. Jane Citation: (1647) Aleyn 26, 82 Eng. Rep. 897 Jurisdiction: England Judgement: The judgement in this case upheld the principle that if a party voluntarily imposes a duty upon themselves through a contract, they are bound to fulfill that duty, even if unforeseen circumstances prevent them from doing so. Abstract: Paradine … Read more

Nugent vs. Smith (1876) 1 C.P.D. 423

Case Name: Nugent v Smith Citation: (1876) 1 C.P.D. 423 Jurisdiction: England and Wales Judgement: The court held that the storm in question was indeed an Act of God, meeting the legal criteria. It emphasized its sudden, violent, and uncontrollable nature, making it impossible to foresee or prevent. As a result, Mr. Nugent was not … Read more

Guru Nanak Foundation vs. Rattan Singh & Sons 1981 AIR 2075, 1982 SCR (1) 842

Case Name: Guru Nanak Foundation vs. Rattan Singh & Sons Citation: 1981 AIR 2075, 1982 SCR (1) 842 Jurisdiction: Supreme Court of India Judgement: The Supreme Court of India recognized the inefficiencies and drawbacks of the traditional court trial system, highlighting the need for alternative dispute resolution methods that are faster, more cost-effective, and less … Read more

Tarapore & Co., Madras vs. M/S. V/O Tractors Export, Moscow 1970 AIR 891, 1969 SCR (2) 920

Case Name: Tarapore & Co., Madras vs. M/S. V/O Tractors Export, Moscow Citation: 1970 AIR 891, 1969 SCR (2) 920 Jurisdiction: This case was heard in the Supreme Court of India. Judgement: The Supreme Court of India ruled in favor of Tarapore & Co., Madras, stating that the contract was frustrated due to the Indian … Read more