Simple search of free and LexisNexis legal content for Australia
– legislation, cases, practical guidance, forms & precedents, journals and newsletters.
Cases
- Miles v Chilton
- Lamprell v Billericay Union
- Dibbs v Goren
- Howcutt v Bonser
- Brown v Andrew
- Burnside v Dayrell
- Purvis v Traill
- Vigers v Dean & Chapter of St Paul's
- Whittle v Henning
- Tulk v Moxhay
- Bull v Faulkner
- Great Western Railway Co v Birmingham & Oxford Junction Railway Co
- Birch v Birch
- North-Eastern Railway Co v Martin
- Irwin v Rogers
- R v Inhabitants of Christchurch
- Attorney-General v Lucas
- Emuss v Smith
- Carter v Taggart
- Graham v D'Arcy
- R v Webb
- Smith v Marsack
- Lock v Ashton
- Healey v Story
- Phillipson v Gatty
- Newport Marsh Trustees, Ex parte
- Peacock v Penson
- Fynn, Re
- R v Mullins
- R v Ward
- Thynne v Glengall
- Webb v Grace
- Field's Marriage Annulling Bill
- R v Kelly
- Baillie v Edwards
- Foley v Hill
- Brunswick, Duke of v King of Hanover
- Glasgow College v Attorney-General
- R v Barton
- R v Inhabitants of St Mary Whitechapel
- Westbrooke, Re
- Van Casteel v Booker
- Blackburn v Smith
- Freeman v Cooke
- Ledsam v Russell
- Walker (a lunatic), Re
- Waring v Waring
- Berkeley v Swinburne
- Beech v Ford
- Kingsbridge Flour Mill Company & Ridley v Plymouth Stonehouse & Devonport Grinding & Baking Company
- Elliott v South Devon Railway Company
- LeFanu v Malcolmson
- Attorney-General v Corporation of Lichfield
- Charlotte, The
- King v Cole
- Hargrave v Hargrave
- Horsfall v Hey
- Phillipson v Gatty
- Jarrett v Kennedy
- Lilley v Harvey
- R v Gillyard
- Wilmer v Currey
- Lindsey v Barron
- Faulkner v Lowe
- Price v Groom
- Simpson v Robinson
- Wilde v Gibson
- Ryan v Sams
- Lord Wellesley v Earl of Mornington (No2)
- Clayards v Dethick & Davis
- R v Shaw
- Hadrick v Heslop & Raine
- Humble v Hunter
- Wilson v Wilson
- Allen v Sharpe
- Lloyd v Jones
- Smart v Sandars
- Lowless & Son, Re
- Doe d Lord v Crago
- Belcher v Bellamy
- Bickford v Parson
- Grote v Chester & Holyhead Railway Co
- Potez v Glossop
- Batty v Marriott
- Stephens v Lord Newborough
- King v Cullen
- Garrett v Wilkinson
- Clarke v Holford
- Fowler v Davies
- London Corporation v Attorney-General
- R v West
- Doe de Egremont v Courtenay
- Lilley v Elwin
- Stevens v Jeacocke
- Dunlop v Higgins
- Powell v Thomas
- Roberts v Roberts
- Syers v Jonas
- Moon v Durden
- Buron v Denman
- Fordyce v Bridges
- Webb, Re
- Riley v Warden
- Manser v Back
- Hibberd v Knight
- Bates v Townley
- Roch v Callen
- Beech v Jones
- Worthington v Warrington
- Christopherson v Bare
- Lindsay v Leigh
- Jacobs v Tarleton
- Clark v Freeman
- Acland v Buller
- Cother v Midland Railway Co
- Crockett v Crockett
- Cother v Midland Railway Co
- Tunnicliffe v Tedd
- Stindt v Roberts
- Master of Clare Hall v Harding
- Pilbrow v Pilbrows Atmospheric Railway Co
- Cox v Glue
- Kershaw v Bailey
- Chancellor v Morecraft
- Vane v Cobbold
- Atkinson v Pocock
- Finch v Miller
- Law v Dodd
- Robertson v Southgate
- Walton v Jones
- Graham v Ingleby & Glover
- Bank of Australasia v Breillat
- Browne v Burton
- Filliter v Phippard
- Varney v Hickman
- Hartley v Cummings
- Baildon v Walton
- R v Cutler, Slaney, Bower & Selby
- Williams v Archer
- Mollett v Wackerbarth
- Smeeton v Collier
- Davenport v James
- Gibbins v North Eastern Metropolitan Asylum District
- Graham v Walker
- Robbins v Fennell
- Shaw v Kay
- Simpson v Margitson
- Wood v Rowcliffe
- Wood v Patteson
- Polack v Tooth
- Friend v Solly
- Wroughton v Colquhoun
- Gloucester, Corporation of v Osborn
- Abbay v Howe
- Okill v Whittaker
- Catterall v Catterall
- Cridland v Lord De Mauley
- Robinson v Wall
- King v Norman
- Rich v Basterfield
- Wainman v Kynman
- Blair v Bromley
- Attorney-General v Magdalen College, Oxford
- R v Symonds
- Thomas v Fredricks
- Exeter & Crediton Railway v Buller
- Jones v Matthie
- Franklyn v Lamond
- Lenaghan v Smith
- Hopkins v Prescott
- Vogel v Thompson
- Woolmer v Toby
- Bromage v Lloyd
- Vollans v Fletcher
- Clark v Newsam & Edwards
- Elderton v Emmens
- R v Garbett
- Wontner v Shairp
- Spence, In re
- Andrews v Bousfield
- Ward v Audland
- Aykroyd, Re; Grimbly v Aykroyd
- Mozley v Alston
- Scott v Pascall & Adams
- Bowyer v Cook
- Harrison v Turner
- Nightingale v Goulburn
- Allen v M'Pherson
- R v Reynolds
- Doe d Gorst v Timothy
- R v Johnson
- R v Heywood
- Giddings v Giddings
- Young v Leith
- Cork & Bandon Railway Company v Cazenove
- Stikeman v Dawson
- Alexander v Mackenzie
- Hughes v Williams
- Hebe, The
- Fremington School, In re; Ex parte Ward