Rodriquez v Ebanks

Core Citations

CITES

• Arnison v Smith
• Batthyany v Walford
• Central Electricity Board v Halifax Corporation

[See more]

• Cooke v Union Bank of London
• Read v Brown
• Lloyd v Dimmack

APPLIES

• Phillips v Homfray
• Re Shephard. Atkins v Shephard
• Stanhope v Stanhope

[See more]

• Dewitt v Dewitt
• Eldridge v Burgess

FOLLOWS

• Doreen Ann Letang (Respondent) Frank Anthony Cooper (Appellant)
• Coburn v Colledge

CITED in

• Rodriquez v Ebanks and Ebanks

REPORTED OPINION OF in

• 2014 1 CILR 264

CONSIDERED in

• Section 92 of the Companies Act (2022 Revision) and Global Cord Blood Corporation
• Section 92 of the Companies Act (2022 Revision) and Global Cord Blood Corporation
• AKS Petitioner v JS Respondent RS & HS Proposed Interveners

This document cites

• Doreen Ann Letang (Respondent) Frank Anthony Cooper (Appellant)
• Johnson v Ribbins
• Central Electricity Board v Halifax Corporation
• Stott v West Yorkshire Road Car Company Ltd
• Lloyd v Dimmack



See all quotations

• Pinchon's Case
• Stanhope v Stanhope
• Cooke v Union Bank of London
• Dewitt v Dewitt
• Wheatley v Lane
• Phillips v Homfray
• Van Gelder, Apsimon & Company v Sowerby Bridge United District Flour Society
• Kendall v Hamilton
• Eldridge v Burgess
• Coburn v Colledge
• Re Shephard. Atkins v Shephard
• Batthyany v Walford
• Read v Brown
• McCheane v Gyles
• Byrne v Brown
• Arnison v Smith