“Rees v Sinclair”的意思、由来-开放百科全书

词条

Rees v Sinclair

释义

Background
References

{{Multiple issues|{{refimprove|date=October 2014}}{{orphan|date=October 2014}}
}}{{Infobox court case
| name = Rees v Sinclair
| court = Court of Appeal of New Zealand
| date_filed =
| image = Coat of arms of New Zealand.svg
| date decided = 3 October 1973
| full name = Rees v Sinclair
| citations = [1974] 1 NZLR 180
| judges = McCarthy P, MacArthur J, Beattie J
| prior actions =
| subsequent actions =
| opinions =
| transcripts =
| Keywords = negligence
}}

Rees v Sinclair [1974] 1 NZLR 180 is a cited case in New Zealand regarding liability for negligence against lawyers.^[1] It effectively reinforced the English case of Rondel v Worsley into New Zealand case law.

Background

Ree had Sinclair represent him in a court case. Rather ironically, Ree was a retired lawyer himself. Anyway, Ree believed Sinclair was negligent in handling his case, and sued him for professional negligence.

Sinclair defended the matter by claiming barristerial immunity.

References

1. ^{{cite book |title=Butterworths Student Companion Torts |edition=4th |last1=McLay |first1=Geoff |publisher=LexisNexis |ISBN=0-408-71686-X|year=2003 |page=}}

4 : Court of Appeal of New Zealand cases|1974 in New Zealand law|1974 in case law|New Zealand tort case law

随便看

开放百科全书收录14589846条英语、德语、日语等多语种百科知识，基本涵盖了大多数领域的百科知识，是一部内容自由、开放的电子版国际百科全书。