AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
1 paragraphs · 77 wordsR.P. Collier, J. 1. For the appellants it was argued that the claim for damages, as measured by the profits of the years 1284 and 1285 F., was not, as regards so much of the damages as had been incurred in that period, barred by the provisions of the Code 2. Their Lordships, however, without calling on counsel for the respondents, intimated that the judgment of the High Court was correct as regarded the matters in question.