3170432
Descripción
Mapa Mental por Rohit Beerapalli, actualizado hace más de 1 año
|
Creado por Rohit Beerapalli
hace más de 9 años
|
|
Indemnity
- Position in English Law
- A plaintiff, having acted on
request of a defendant, is
entitled to assume that if the act
was wrongful, he will be
indemnified by the defendant.
- Adamson v. Jarvis
- Plaintiff sold defendant's cattle, which did not belong
to him.
- Auctioneer held liable by original owner.
- Plaintiff having acted on the
request of the defendant, was
entitled to assume that he
would be indemnified by the
defendant.
- Plaintiff having acted on the
request of the defendant, was
entitled to assume that he
would be indemnified by the
defendant.
- Auctioneer held liable by original owner.
- Plaintiff sold defendant's cattle, which did not belong
to him.
- Indemnity wide enough
to include loss arising
any cause whatsoever.
- Dugdale v. Lovering
- Plaintiffs were in possession of trucks
claimed by two defendants and K.P.
Co.
- Plaintiffs delivered trucks to
defendant after asking for
indemnity and getting no reply.
- Entitled to recover on an
implied promise, by demanding
indemnity, made clear that no
intention to deliver without.
- Entitled to recover on an
implied promise, by demanding
indemnity, made clear that no
intention to deliver without.
- Plaintiffs delivered trucks to
defendant after asking for
indemnity and getting no reply.
- Plaintiffs were in possession of trucks
claimed by two defendants and K.P.
Co.
- Sheffield Corporation v. Barclay
- Corporation Registered
transfer of Stock on request of
banker.
- Transfers were discovered to be forgeries.
- Entitled to recover from banker.
- Entitled to recover from banker.
- Transfers were discovered to be forgeries.
- Corporation Registered
transfer of Stock on request of
banker.
- Adamson v. Jarvis
- A plaintiff, having acted on
request of a defendant, is
entitled to assume that if the act
was wrongful, he will be
indemnified by the defendant.
- Position in Indian Law
- Section 124
- Definition
- Scope is much narrower
than in English Law
- Loss arising from
accidents excluded
in definition.
- Situations involving
instructions from wrongful
owner, like Adamson v. Jarvis,
will fall under Section 223.
(Principle-Agent indemnity)
- Situations involving
instructions from wrongful
owner, like Adamson v. Jarvis,
will fall under Section 223.
(Principle-Agent indemnity)
- Loss arising from
accidents excluded
in definition.
- One party promising to
save the other due to loss
caused by the promisor, or
any other party.
- Secy of State for India in Council
v. Bank of India Ltd.
- A person delivered a forged
endorsement to a Bank,
which received it in exchange
for money.
- Bank sent the note to Public Debt
Office to renew in their name.
- True owner of the note recovered
compensation from the State.
- State was allowed to recover
from the Bank on an implied
promise of indemnity.
- State was allowed to recover
from the Bank on an implied
promise of indemnity.
- True owner of the note recovered
compensation from the State.
- Bank sent the note to Public Debt
Office to renew in their name.
- A person delivered a forged
endorsement to a Bank,
which received it in exchange
for money.
- Secy of State for India in Council
v. Bank of India Ltd.
- Scope is much narrower
than in English Law
- Definition
- Section 125
- Rights of Indemnity Holder
when sued.
- When does liability commence?
- Gajanan Moreshwar v.
Moreshwar Madan Mantri
- Explained the departure from
the idea that action was not
maintainable until actual loss
was incurred.
- The indemnified had to
wait till a judgement and
satisfy it before he could
use on his indemnity.
- Sometimes threw an
intolerable burden
on indemnity holder.
- Might not be in a position to
satisfy judgement, but could
not avail of indemnity until he
had done so.
- Court of Equity stepped in and said that the indemnified was
entitled to sue as soon as his liability became absolute.
- Court of Equity stepped in and said that the indemnified was
entitled to sue as soon as his liability became absolute.
- Might not be in a position to
satisfy judgement, but could
not avail of indemnity until he
had done so.
- Sometimes threw an
intolerable burden
on indemnity holder.
- The indemnified had to
wait till a judgement and
satisfy it before he could
use on his indemnity.
- Explained the departure from
the idea that action was not
maintainable until actual loss
was incurred.
- Richardson Re, Ex Parte the
Governors of St. Thomas's
Hospital.
- Indemnity is not given by
repayment after payment, it
requires that the indemnified
shall never be called upon to pay.
- Indian Cases on this principle.
- Osman Jamal v. Gopal Purshottam
- A company was the commission agent
for the defendant firm, and it bought
certain goods in that capacity.
- Supplier was entitled to recover
from the company, but it went
into liquidation before paying.
- Held that Official Liquidator could
recover from defendants, even though
the company had never paid. Money
had to be set aside for full payment to
vendors.
- Held that Official Liquidator could
recover from defendants, even though
the company had never paid. Money
had to be set aside for full payment to
vendors.
- Supplier was entitled to recover
from the company, but it went
into liquidation before paying.
- A company was the commission agent
for the defendant firm, and it bought
certain goods in that capacity.
- Abdul Hussain v.
Bombay Metal
Syndicate
- Plaintiffs had sold goods to
defendants. Defendants
provided a letter indemnifying
plaintiff from sales tax.
- When asked to pay tax, plaintiff
asked defendants to do so, they
did not.
- Plaintiff deposited money himself,
filed suit to recover money more than
3 years after getting tax notice.
- Plaintiff is entitled to wait and institute suit after
damnification and sufferance of loss. Within period of
limitation as period starts from date of payment of tax.
- Plaintiff is entitled to wait and institute suit after
damnification and sufferance of loss. Within period of
limitation as period starts from date of payment of tax.
- Plaintiff deposited money himself,
filed suit to recover money more than
3 years after getting tax notice.
- When asked to pay tax, plaintiff
asked defendants to do so, they
did not.
- Plaintiffs had sold goods to
defendants. Defendants
provided a letter indemnifying
plaintiff from sales tax.
- Osman Jamal v. Gopal Purshottam
- Indemnity is not given by
repayment after payment, it
requires that the indemnified
shall never be called upon to pay.
- Gajanan Moreshwar v.
Moreshwar Madan Mantri
- When does liability commence?
- Rights of Indemnity Holder
when sued.
- Section 124
¿Quieres crear tus propios Mapas Mentales gratis con GoConqr? Más información.