Arthur and Arthur v Anker
Language: English Series: New Property Cases ; (1995) NPC 187Publication details: 1995Subject(s): Summary: CA 30 November 1995. A trespasser in a car park who was aware that a wheelclamping regime was in operation fails, on grounds of volenti, to recover damages against the security firm which wheelclamped his vehicle. He is not, however damage feasant. Wheelclampers do not commit theft or in this case, blackmail in England. (Headnote from journal). NO PHOTOCOPYING ALLOWED.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | X2860 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 26906-1001 |
Browsing London shelves, Shelving location: Journal article Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
CA 30 November 1995. A trespasser in a car park who was aware that a wheelclamping regime was in operation fails, on grounds of volenti, to recover damages against the security firm which wheelclamped his vehicle. He is not, however damage feasant. Wheelclampers do not commit theft or in this case, blackmail in England. (Headnote from journal). NO PHOTOCOPYING ALLOWED.