How many times has [2001] 1 AC 1 been cited?

[2001] 1 AC 1 is cited by 2 judgment(s) in this dataset.

[2001] 1 AC 1

· 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

[2001] 1 AC 1

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

Cited · 2

Cited — Rees & Anor v Windsor-Clive & Ors 2020-07-01
“…n. Clearly, they all contemplate a serious interference before the principle is engaged. That is consonant with what Lord Millett said in Southwark LBC v Mills [2001] 1 AC 1, 23. Having said that there was little difference between derogation from grant and breach of the covenant for quiet enjoyment he said:…”
Cited — Fearn & Ors v The Board of Trustees of the Tate Gallery 2020-02-12
“…ng at the highest level (see, for example, Cambridge Water Co. v Eastern Counties Leather plc [1994] 2 AC 264 at 299, Southwark London Borough Council v Tanner [2001] 1 AC 1 at 15-16, 20) Bramwell B said (at p.83):…”