Verrall v Great Yarmouth BC [1981] QB 202
Country:
United Kingdom
Reviewed By Oxbridge Law Team
Updated 2024-01-04 07:02:09 UTC
Defendant contracted to let Plaintiff use the town hall for a National Front demo and then repudiated (following council elections).
Defendant sued Plaintiff and an injunction was granted.
CA held that where practical, the courts will enforce licenses by injunction/SP, even where the licensee has not yet taken possession.
Any comments or edits about this case?
Get in touch Similar cases
King v David Allen
Plaintiff was granted a license by Defendant to advertise on his building for a set period and Defendant agreed to do whatever was necessary to prevent anyone else advertising there. Defendant then s...
Hounslow LBC v Twickenham Garden Developments
Plaintiff contracted with Defendant for Defendant to build on Plaintiff’s site. There was a clause that if Plaintiff had served notice that Defendant’s work was not progressing adequately, and this w...
Hussain v Lancaster City Council
Plaintiff ran a shop on a council estate and sued the council, Defendant, for failing to use its powers to stop certain residents from committing acts of criminal harassment against. CA struck out th...
Tanner v Tanner
Defendant and Plaintiff had children and agreed that a house should be purchased for Defendant and the children. Plaintiff paid for the house and Defendant left her rent-controlled flat to live there...
Winter Garden Theatre v Millenium Productions
Plaintiff sold Defendant a license to show plays for 6 months, including an option to renew the licence for another 6 months, and at the end of the second period, to renew their license at a set rate...
Ambitious and intelligent students
choose Oxbridge Notes.
- Customer Support
- Sellers FAQ
- Contact Us
- Privacy Policy
- Terms and Conditions
©2024 Oxbridge Notes. All right reserved.