![]() |
RDG
online Restitution Discussion Group Archives |
||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
||||||||||||
|
I neglected
previously to point out that the "defensible outcome" in the situation covered
by Bowen, L.J.'s assertion could be achieved by an action for mesne profits.
If I remember the relevant statute, this action would today, survive against
the trespasser's estate, as would an action for trespass against the taker
of the horse in Lord Mansfield's example.
-----Original Message----- When he claims that Lord Ellenborough,
C.J., specifically rejected a ratification theory in his judgment in Taylor
v. Plumer, is Lionel referring to the last sentence of his Lordship's
judgment? If so, I endeavoured in [2000] R.L.R. at 213 (in n.157 and its
accompanying text) to explain that sentence's relationship to his Lordship's
acceptance arguendo of ratification as the basis of waiver of tort, which
I had quoted ibid. at 210.
<== Previous message Back to index Next message ==> |
||||||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
» » » » » |
|
![]() |
|||||||||
![]() |