dbo:abstract
|
- Royal Bank of Scotland plc v Etridge (No 2) [2001] UKHL 44 (11 October 2001) is a leading case relevant for English land law and English contract law on the circumstances under which actual and presumed undue influence can be argued to vitiate consent to a contract. (en)
|
dbo:thumbnail
| |
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
| |
dbo:wikiPageID
| |
dbo:wikiPageLength
|
- 27775 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)
|
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
| |
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
| |
dbp:citations
|
- [2001] 2 All ER 1061 (en)
- [2001] 3 WLR 1021 (en)
- [2001] 4 All ER 449 (en)
- [2001] UKHL 44 (en)
- [2002] 2 AC 773 (en)
|
dbp:court
| |
dbp:dateDecided
| |
dbp:decisionBy
| |
dbp:fullName
|
- Royal Bank of Scotland Plc v Etridge , Barclays Bank Plc v Coleman, Barclays Bank Plc v Harris, Midland Bank Plc v Wallace, National Westminster Bank Plc v Gill, UCB Home Loans Corp Ltd v Moore, Bank of Scotland v Bennett, Kenyon-Brown v Desmond Banks & Co (en)
|
dbp:keywords
|
- Undue influence, matrimonial home (en)
|
dbp:name
| |
dbp:priorActions
|
- Immediate prior actions: Three appeals from pre-trial stage striking them out, five from High Court trial decision or Court of Appeal decision. (en)
|
dbp:subsequentActions
|
- Wallace and Harris interlocutory; arguable cases made out; ordered: wife could go to trial hearings as to the substantial evidence; Morris interlocutory; appeal wholly allowed no need for trial. (en)
|
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
| |
dcterms:subject
| |
gold:hypernym
| |
rdf:type
| |
rdfs:comment
|
- Royal Bank of Scotland plc v Etridge (No 2) [2001] UKHL 44 (11 October 2001) is a leading case relevant for English land law and English contract law on the circumstances under which actual and presumed undue influence can be argued to vitiate consent to a contract. (en)
|
rdfs:label
|
- Royal Bank of Scotland plc v Etridge (No 2) (en)
|
owl:sameAs
| |
prov:wasDerivedFrom
| |
foaf:depiction
| |
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
| |
is dbo:wikiPageRedirects
of | |
is dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
of | |
is foaf:primaryTopic
of | |