From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.
Peek v. Gurney
House of Lords
6 H.L. 377 (1873)
- Written by Eric Miller, JD
Facts
The prospectus for a proposed company, Overend and Gurney (defendant), included information intended to induce the purchase of shares, which later proved misleading. The prospectus was issued in July, and all shares were allotted before July was over. Peek (plaintiff) purchased large numbers of shares in Overend and Gurney on the stock exchange in October and December. After the company’s dissolution, Peek sought indemnity. The master of the rolls rejected Peek’s claim because Peek was not among the original allottees of shares. Peek appealed. The House of Lords granted certiorari.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Cairns, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
