Gilbert v Shananan

JurisdictionNew Zealand
Date1998
Year1998
CourtCourt of Appeal
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
85 cases
  • Marlborough District Council v Altimarloch Joint Venture Ltd
    • New Zealand
    • Supreme Court
    • 5 Marzo 2012
    ...in SAAMCO at 218B of the same concept of reduction or elimination of a loss. 143 See for example the discussion in Gilbert v Shanahan [1998] 3 NZLR 528 (CA) and Davys Burton v Thom [2008] NZSC 65, [2009] 1 NZLR 144 As was done in Shuman v Coober Pedy Tours Pty Ltd. 145 This section is conc......
  • Marlborough District Council v Altimarloch Joint Venture
    • New Zealand
    • Supreme Court
    • 5 Marzo 2012
    ...in SAAMCO at 218B of the same concept of reduction or elimination of a loss. See for example the discussion in Gilbert v Shanahan [1998] 3 NZLR 528 (CA) and Davys Burton v Thom [2008] NZSC 65, [2009] 1 NZLR Council could not have been required to pay anything towards the shortfall in the co......
  • Burgess v Monk
    • New Zealand
    • High Court
    • 20 Diciembre 2017
    ...and plant and equipment not included in the sale, provided such right shall lapse on the 31st of December 2009. Gilbert v Shanahan [1998] 3 NZLR 528 Ibid, at 535, applying Everist v McEvedy [1996] 3 NZLR 348 (HC) at 355. See para [488] above. [493] The agreement for sale and purchase was si......
  • Spire Property Development LLP v Withers LLP
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 19 Julio 2022
    ...duty extends to giving advice that is “reasonably incidental”. This is an elastic phrase, similar to that adopted in Gilbert v Shanahan [1998] 3 NZLR 528 (“ Gilbert”) (at 537) to the effect that “matters which fairly and reasonably arise” in the course of carrying out express instructions a......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • AN ACCOUNT OF ACCOUNTS
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 2016, December 2016
    • 1 Diciembre 2016
    ...134 The facts of Keech v Sandford[1726] Sel Cas 1 King 61 provides an example of this situation. 135[2001] 2 BCLC 531 at [53]. 136[1998] 3 NZLR 528. 137Bank of New Zealand v New Zealand Guardian Trust Co Ltd[1999] 1 NZLR 664 at 687; Gilbert v Shanahan[1998] 3 NZLR 528. 138Libertarian Invest......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT