Talk:Central London Property Trust Ltd v High Trees House Ltd

Sword/shield[edit]

Anyone want to elaborate on the sword/shield concept?

Have a look at Combe v Combe and Walton Stores v Maher. Wik idea 23:31, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Judgement[edit]

Is it really necessary to have that big chunk of quote in the Judgement section? It seems unsightly and unencyclopaedic. Might it be better to have a brief summary of the main points of the judgement, interspersed with short supporting quotes? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bunburya (talk • contribs) 16:03, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's a leading judgment. It works like a casebook. Wik idea 23:29, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The opening sentence is contradictory. It states Lord Denning's decision was drawing upon Hughes v Metropolitian Railway, but this case was decided well after CLPT. Thus CLPT could not have used Hughes as an authority. This is misleading and poor legal scholar. -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.111.13.200 (talk) 05:31, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hughes v Metropolitan Railway took place in the 1870s, long before CLPT. LynwoodF (talk) 14:14, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Poor citations relating to both the case and judgement quote. suggest OSCOLA? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Will3103 (talk • contribs) 06:11, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]