Dimes v Grand Junction Canal Proprietors [1852]


  • Regarding the sale of land crossed by a canal, a value had to be decided by the judge


  • Could the decision be quashed as the judge had a significant number of shares in the defendant company


  • Yes


  • The decision, had it been upheld, would have been to the significant financial benefit to the judge
RELATED CASE  Hazell v Hammersmith & Fulham London Borough Council [1992]

Posted in Public Law Revision Notes.

This page was last updated on 11th April 2014

© 2020 Webstroke Law - Terms and Privacy Policy