How many times has [1920] AC 222 been cited?

[1920] AC 222 is cited by 3 judgment(s) in this dataset.

[1920] AC 222

· cited by 3 · influence score 14/100

Is it still good law? No negative treatment found in this dataset — it has been cited without being doubted or overruled here.

How to cite

[1920] AC 222

Neutral citation format (OSCOLA). Always confirm against the official judgment.

Cited · 3

Cited — Avondale Park Limited v Miss Delaney's Nursery Schools Limited 2023-06-07
“…Quesnel Forks Gold Mining Co Ltd v Ward [1920] AC 222 was a similar case. A mining lease provided that if the lessee should cease to work the mine for two years “then this demise shall become absolutely forfeited …”
Cited — Abdulrahman Bin Abdullah bin Ibrahim Al-Subaihi & Anor. v Mishal Maan Al-Sanea 2022-10-20
“…he party in breach cannot take advantage of their own wrongdoing: Davenport v The Queen [2877] 3 App Cas 115, 129 (PC); Quesnel Forks Gold Mining Co Ltd v Ward [1920] AC 222, 226-7 (PC); Python (Monty) Pictures Ltd v Paragon Entertainment Corp [1998] EMLR 640, 683. As to what Mr Mishal Al-Sanea claims he was told or understood befo…”
Cited — Abdulrahman Bin Abdullah bin Ibrahim Al-Subaihi & Anor. v Mishal Maan Al-Sanea 2022-10-20
“…lauses rendering a contract void due to breach of contract by one party as “void, at the option of the innocent party”: Quesnel Forks Gold Mining Co Ltd v Ward [1920] AC 222 (“Quesnel”) at 226; Davenport v The Queen [1877] 3 App Cas 115 (PC) (“Davenport”) at 128-9; Python Pictures v Paragon Entertainment [1998] EMLR 640 at 683; Law…”