...( dissdiss. Lord Robertson) that the voluntary liquidation and sale had not rescinded or put an end to the contract of 1898, and that the Portland Cement Company to whom the business had been assigned was entitled to enforce the contract. In two actions, both raised in the Commercial Court, one by Alfred Tolhurst against the Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers, Limited...there the business of Portland cement manufacturers. It was of course important for Tolhurst to secure a regular market for his chalk, and it was equally important for the Imperial Company to secure...Contract — Effect of Voluntary Liquidation and Sale of Business. By contract dated in 1898 the owner of some chalk quarries undertook to supply a Portland Cement Company for...

...I agree in all respectswith the speech of my noble and learned friend Lord Atkin inHarris v. Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers, Ltd. (1939,A.C. 71, at pp. 78 and 79...case, and is also inconsistentwith what this House said later in Thomas v. Ocean Coal Co.. 1933A.C. 100 and Harris v. Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers,Ltd., 1939 A.C.... M'Ferrin1926 A.C. 377 and Harris v. Associated Portland Cement Manu-facturers Ld. 1939 A.C. 71 which deals with the associated subjectof negligence, affords authority which should be...

...behalf of Mr Barber: Ross v Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers Ltd [1964] 1 WLR 768, 775 per Lord Reid. So, on balance, I would not disturb the judge's...

...original party to the transfer of 1977 the option is not saved on that account as a personal obligation. (c.f. South Eastern Railway Company v. Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers (1900) & Ltd...

...Building Supplies[1959] 1 All ER 414 3. Ross v Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers (1964) 1 WLR 7684...

...Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers (1900) Ltd and Sharpe v...difficulty may be illustrated by comparing South Eastern Railway Co. v Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers (1900) Ltd. with Sharpe v. Durrant...sewer under Pine Tree Hill at the dates of the grants to her predecessors in title the plaintiff could have claimed, on authority of the Associated Portland Cement case, that the owners of the pink...

...it would happen on that particular day than it was "in the stars" that the delayed vessel in Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers (1900)Ltd v Houlder Brothers...

...charter". I do not regard the case of Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers v. Houlder Bros. (1917, 22 Comm.Cas., 279) as any...Cement Manufacturers v. Houlder Bros. (1917, 22 Com. Cas.,279, at 281), where Mr Justice Atkin said: "The obligation of the defendants to be ready to load on May 25th by...charterers to repudiate? Or was it a term which, if broken, restricted the charterers to claiming damages? The owners urge the latter, and rely on Associated Portland...

...where the committee has misdirected itself (eg Scottish Nuclear Ltd v Ass for Lanarkshire, [2002] RA 280; Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers Ltd v Ass for...

...evidence led on her behalf (Ross v Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers Ltd [1964] 1 WLR 768, Lord Reid at p 775). In other words, the Lord Ordinary...Mr Columbine's evidence, even if (which we doubt) Lord Reid's dicta in Ross v Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers Ltd, supra, were thought to be applicable in a case where the defenders fully...

...based on unsafe system, the pursuer has to show that there was some reason for [31] As regards the argument based on Ross v Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers, that and...months is too long?". This submission was based on the dictum of Lord Reid in Ross v Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers at p. 755. What his Lordship said was...

...in danger of being frozen in, unless she sailed promptly. On the other hand, in Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers (1900), Limited v. Houlder Brothers & Co...

...identity of the person to whom the obligation is owed is an essential aspect of it: see Tolhurst v Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers Ltd...

...Portland Cement Manufacturers Limited [1964] 1 W.L.R. 768 at pages 775 and 785; Johnstone v City of Glasgow District Council 1986 S.L.T. 50, at page 52; Richardson v...favourable to him, as opposed to the respondent. In making that submission counsel for the reclaimers relied on several cases. It is appropriate to mention Ross v Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers Limited...

...substantial period. For his discretion in drawing inferences, reference was made to Lord Reid's observations in Ross v. Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers Ltd...

...v Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers (1900) Ltd [1903] AC 414). We are not persuaded that any of the other terms of the missives ought to lead to the opposite conclusion...

...the Court was not only entitled to draw the least favourable inferences from the perspective of the pursuer's case but it should draw such inferences: Ross v Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers 1964...and inside of the building to be surveyed. Mr McIntyre had assessed the roof from a ground level and identified it as being constructed from corrugated asbestos-cement panels. Mr McIntyre considered...

...Tolhurst v Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers [1902] 2 KB 660 CA at 668 and his skeleton paragraphs 6-7) and this is usually effected without the consent of the other original...

...challenges that decision on appeal to the House. 5. Mr Matthews was employed by Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers (1978) Ltd from 1973-81 at their factory in Strood, Kent. He was...chest pain in March 1999. In February 2000 a diagnosis of mesothelioma was made. His condition has continued to deteriorate, and his life expectancy is now measured in months. Associated Portland Cement...substantial quantities of asbestos dust in the course of successive employments by the two respondents, Associated Portland Cement and British Uralite. It is accepted that both employers were in breach...

...Portland Cement Manufacturers [1964] 1 W.L.R. 768, at pages 775, 784-5, and 788; and O'Donnell v Murdoch McKenzie & Co...submissions, and taking into account where necessary the guidance in Ross v Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers and O'Donnell v Murdoch McKenzie & Co., cit...