Naylor v Preston Area Health Authority
Linked as:
Extract
Naylor v Preston Area Health Authority
No longer available (Autolink)
See the full content of this document
Core Citations
CONSIDERS
- Wilsher v Essex Area Health Authority
- Kirkup v British Rail Engineering Ltd; Priestley v British Rail Engineering Ltd; Painter v British Rail Engineering Ltd
REFERS TO
- Causton v Mann Egerton (Johnsons) Ltd
- Lee v South West Thames Regional Health Authority
- Kirkup v British Rail Engineering Ltd; Priestley v British Rail Engineering Ltd; Painter v British Rail Engineering Ltd
CONSIDERS
DISTINGUISHES
CITED in
- Powell and another v Boldaz and Others
- Das v Ganju
- R v Mid-Glamorgan Family Health Services and Another, ex parte Martin
[See more]
REFERRED in
- Rossiter and another v Tilsley and another
- Mercer v Chief Constable of the Lancashire Constabulary
- Khan v Armaguard Ltd
[See more]
APPLIED in
CONSIDERED in
- Pratima Rani Das (Plaintiff/Respondentdr) v Durga Ganju
- The Queen v Mid Glamorgan Family Health Services Authority (1st Respondents) South Glamorgan Health Authority (2nd Respondents) ex parte Trevor Martin
- The Queen v Mid Glamorgan Family Health Services Authority (1st Respondents) South Glamorgan Health Authority (2nd Respondents) ex parte Trevor Martin
[See more]
REPORTED OPINION OF in
This document cites