Talk:Central London Property Trust Ltd v High Trees House Ltd

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Law (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.


Anyone want to elaborate on the sword/shield concept?

Have a look at Combe v Combe and Walton Stores v Maher. Wikidea 23:31, 6 June 2009 (UTC)


Is it really necessary to have that big chunk of quote in the Judgement section? It seems unsightly and unencyclopaedic. Might it be better to have a brief summary of the main points of the judgement, interspersed with short supporting quotes? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bunburya (talkcontribs) 16:03, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it's a leading judgment. It works like a casebook. Wikidea 23:29, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

The opening sentence is contradictory. It states Lord Denning's decision was drawing upon Hughes v Metropolitian Railway, but this case was decided well after CLPT. Thus CLPT could not have used Hughes as an authority. This is misleading and poor legal scholar. -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:31, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Hughes v Metropolitan Railway took place in the 1870s, long before CLPT. LynwoodF (talk) 14:14, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

Poor citations relating to both the case and judgement quote. suggest OSCOLA? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Will3103 (talkcontribs) 06:11, 11 February 2018 (UTC)