Skip to content
The Law Easy

Case law library

Landmark judgments, explained

Facts, issues, judgment and the legal principle of each case, in plain English. Citations are shown only after they have been verified.

83 cases explained

This case established the principle that a contract is void if there is no "meeting of the minds" (consensus ad idem) . It deals with mutual mistake , where both parties misunderstood an essential contract term.

Law of Contract I (General Principles)

Gherulal Parakh vs Mahadeodas Maiya

Supreme Court of India · 1959

First, let us understand the basic meaning. Section 30 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 says a wagering agreement — where two parties bet on an uncertain event, one winning and one losing depending on the outcome — is void : the law simply will not enforce it, and neither party can go to court over…

Law of Contract I (General Principles)

⚖️ Felthouse v. Bindley [1862] EWHC CP J35: Case Summary ⚖️ A landmark case on silence and acceptance in contract law 📌 Introduction This case established the principle that silence does not constitute acceptance in contract law and clarified that an offeror cannot impose an obligation on the offer…

Law of Contract I (General Principles)

Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co.

Law of Contract I (General Principles)

A landmark case on unilateral contracts and acceptance by performance

Law of Contract I (General Principles)

Harvey v. Facey

Law of Contract I (General Principles)

Understanding the fine line between an offer and an invitation to treat

Law of Contract I (General Principles)

GVK Industries Ltd. vs Income Tax Officer

Supreme Court of India (Constitution Bench) · 2011

First, let us understand the basic meaning. Article 245 of the Constitution deals with how far laws made by Parliament and State legislatures can extend. GVK Industries Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer (2011) answers a precise question: can Parliament make laws about things that happen outside the terri…

Constitutional Law I

P.A. Inamdar vs State of Maharashtra

Supreme Court of India (Constitution Bench) · 2005

First, let us understand the basic meaning. T.M.A. Pai Foundation vs. State of Karnataka (2002) laid down broad principles on the rights of private educational institutions — but because those principles were stated broadly, different High Courts interpreted them differently, and petitions piled up…

Constitutional Law II

Vishaka vs State of Rajasthan

Supreme Court of India · 1997

First, let us understand the basic meaning. Before 1997, India had no specific law defining or prohibiting sexual harassment at the workplace. Vishaka & Ors. vs. State of Rajasthan (1997) answers a foundational question: when Parliament has made no law on a subject, can the Supreme Court still step…

Constitutional Law II

Shankari Prasad vs Union of India

Supreme Court of India · 1951

First, let us understand the basic meaning. Article 13(2) of the Constitution says: the State shall not make any law which takes away or abridges Fundamental Rights, and any law that does so is void. Shankari Prasad Singh Deo vs. Union of India (1951) asked one sharp question: does the word "law" i…

Constitutional Law II

Modern Dental College vs State of MP

Supreme Court of India (Constitution Bench) · 2016

First, let us understand the basic meaning. Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution gives every citizen the right to practise any profession or carry on any occupation, trade or business — and running an educational institution counts as exercising this right. But no right in the Constitution is absol…

Constitutional Law II

Kesavananda Bharati vs State of Kerala

Supreme Court of India (13-Judge Constitution Bench) · 1973

First, let us understand the basic meaning. The Basic Structure Doctrine is a rule created by the Supreme Court of India which says: Parliament can amend (change) almost any part of the Constitution, but it cannot change the parts that form the Constitution's core identity — its "basic structure."…

Constitutional Law II