Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

2 results

  • 10 - Giving Notice of Equitable Assignments and Its Effect on Competing Assignees: The ‘Rule’ in Dearle v. Hall

  • from Part IV - Notice
  • C. H. Tham, Singapore Management University
  • Book:
    Understanding the Law of Assignment
    Published online:
    10 October 2019
    Print publication:
    17 October 2019, pp 205-245

  • Summary

    This chpater explains how the so-called ‘rule’ in Dearle v. Hall is not a special rule devised in connection with equitable assigments, but us actually the working-out the general rule of priority in equity, that qui prior est tempore potior est jure (‘he who is first in time has the better right’) in light of the Golden Rule, that one should do as one would wish to be done by. This chapter reveals that it is the giving of notice of assignment which is key, so as to bring an assignee within the Golden Rule, thereby potentially putting such assignee in a position of a better equity as compared with an assignee who had not acted in accordance with the Golden Rule.