JT Stratford & Son Ltd v Lindley
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
JT Stratford & Son Ltd v Lindley [1965] AC 269 is a UK labour law case that concerns economic tort and strike action.
CourtHouse of Lords
Decided28 July 1964
Citations
- [1965] AC 269
- [1964] 3 WLR 541
- [1964] 3 All ER 102
- [1964] 2 Lloyd's Rep 133
- [1964] 7 WLUK 102
- 108 SJLB 636
- (1964) 108 SJ 636
- [1964] CLY 3702
Prior actions
- JT Stratford & Son v Lindley [1964] 1 Lloyd's Rep 138 (High Court)
- JT Stratford & Son v Lindley [1964] 2 WLR 1002 (Court of Appeal)
| JT Stratford & Son Ltd v Lindley | |
|---|---|
| |
| Court | House of Lords |
| Decided | 28 July 1964 |
| Citations |
|
| Case history | |
| Prior actions |
|
| Appealed from | Court of Appeal (Civil Division) |
| Related actions |
|
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting | Lord Reid, Viscount Radcliffe, Lord Pearce, Lord Upjohn, Lord Donovan |
| Keywords | |
| Right to strike, common law, fundamental right | |
Facts
The union embargoed JT Stratford & Son, the parent company of a subsidiary that the union was in dispute with. They refused to handle the barges of JT Stratford.
Judgment
The House of Lords held
Lord Reid said the following.[1]
The respondents' action made it practically impossible for the appellants to do any new business with the barge hirers.
It was not disputed that such interference is tortious if any unlawful means are employed.
