Talk:Royal British Bank v Turquand
Latest comment: 18 years ago by Dimmelman in topic Proposed merge
 | This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Proposed merge
edit- Merge. The case clearly has no significance outside the rule and vice versa. Suggest taking any additional material from "Turquand Rule" and posting it as a sub-para under "Royal British Bank v Turquand". Unless anyone lodges any objections, I'm happy to do it. Legis 07:51, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
- Merge Agreed. Makes sense to me... PurityControl 06:20, 4 October 2006 (UTC)