How many times has [1976] A.C. 104 been cited?

[1976] A.C. 104 is cited by 2 judgment(s) in this dataset.

[1976] A.C. 104

· cited by 2 · influence score 13/100

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

[1976] A.C. 104

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

Considered · 2

Considered — BV Nederlandse Industrie Van Eiprodukten v Rembrandt Enterprises, Inc. 2019-04-09
“…rent from what it is today. But for the fact that Reynell v Sprye was (as we shall see) relied on in the duress case in the Privy Council in Barton v Armstrong [1976] A.C. 104 it might not be considered an important authority today.…”
Considered — BV Nederlandse Industrie Van Eiprodukten v Rembrandt Enterprises, Inc. 2019-04-09
“…This state of the law was considered by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in the duress case of Barton v Armstrong [1976] A.C. 104 on appeal from the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of New South Wales. Barton alleged that a deed, made with Armstrong setting out the terms in which he (…”