Re Seaford, decd

Core Citations

---

DOUBTS

• Kruhlak v Kruhlak (No. 2)

CONSIDERS

• Tabernacle Permanent Building Society v Knight

REFERS TO

• Clarke v Bradlaugh
• Woolfenden v Woolfenden
• Edwards v The Queen

[See more]

• Richard Whitaker v Wisbey
• Re North. ex parte Hasluck
• Re Warren (F. B.)ex parte Wheeler (A. M.) v Trustee in Bankruptcy
• Lord Porchester v Petrie
• Harvey v Lovekin
• Lyttleton and Another against Cross and Moody, Executors of Hugh Lush, Deceased

RESUELVE RECURSO

• Re Seaford, decd

APPLIES

• Stanhope v Stanhope

REVERSES

• Re Seaford, decd

CONSIDERS

• Wright v Mills
• Matrimonial Causes Rules, 1957
• Administration of Estates Act 1925 - Articles : S-46

CONSIDERED in

• Victor Albert Lacey (Appellant) Anne Margaret Lacey (Respondent) Terry Allan Lacey (by his Guardian the Official Solicitor) (Second Respondent)
• Siamone F. McKenzie v Nathaniel McKenzie
• Austin et Al v Hart

CITED in

• Henderson and Anor v National Australia Bank Ltd

FOLLOWED in

• Teresa Kuan Chin v Chua Sze Chiang

APPROVED in

• Hou Wa Yi v Yap Kiat Cheong

REFERRED in

• Purse v Purse

REPORTED OPINION OF in

• [1968] 1 All ER 482
• [1968] 2 WLR 155
• [1968] P 53

APPLIED in

• Re Palmer, decd. (A Debtor)

This document cites

---

• Lord Porchester v Petrie
• Re Warren (F. B.)ex parte Wheeler (A. M.) v Trustee in Bankruptcy
• Wright v Mills
• Woolfenden v Woolfenden
• Stanhope v Stanhope



See all quotations

• Harvey v Lovekin
• Lyttleton and Another against Cross and Moody, Executors of Hugh Lush, Deceased
• Edwards v The Queen
• Tabernacle Permanent Building Society v Knight
• Clarke v Bradlaugh
• Richard Whitaker v Wisbey
• Re North. ex parte Hasluck
• Re Seaford, decd
• Kruhlak v Kruhlak (No. 2)
• Administration of Estates Act 1925