Home / Volume 4, Issue 3 / Case Analysis of Quinn v Leathem Open access · CC BY-NC 4.0
Research Paper Volume 4 Issue 3 5520 - 5527 June 27, 2021

Case Analysis of Quinn v Leathem

Lead author · Corresponding
Aditya Singh
Student at Kirit .P. Mehta School of Law, Mumbai, India
Co-author
Saumya Singh Thakur
Student at Kirit .P. Mehta School of Law, Mumbai, India
View PDF Full text DOIhttps://doij.org/10.10000/IJLMH.111093
Abstract

Quinn v Leathem [1901] AC 495, is a case on economic tort and is an important case historically for British labour law. It concerns the tort of "conspiracy to injure.” The case was a significant departure from previous practices, and was reversed by the Trade Disputes Act 1906. This short paper presents the facts and judgment of Quinn v Leathem and its outcome in the environment. Furthermore it also states the economic evaluation of the case. In this case Quinn's appeal was dismissed because the Court determined that his conspiracy to unjustly and deliberately convince Leathem's own workers and customers to stop working for/buying from him was actionable only if damage was proven. The case conveys that while people can gather lawfully (even if it harms others' interests), it becomes illegal if the gathering is exclusively for the purpose of inflicting harm to another. Any deliberately committed infringement of someone's legal rights (whether contractual, tortious, or otherwise) with no explanation or justification is liable in tort.

Type
Research Paper
Information
International Journal of Law Management and Humanities, Volume 4, Issue 3, Page 5520 - 5527
DOI: https://doij.org/10.10000/IJLMH.111093
Creative Commons
CC BY-NC 4.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution–NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits remixing, adapting, and building upon the work for non-commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © IJLMH 2026
Disclaimer
The views and opinions expressed in this manuscript are those of the author(s) alone and do not reflect the views, policies, or position of the Journal.

Export citation


        
📢 Call for Papers — Volume IX Issue III now open  ·  Impact Factor 7.010  ·  Indexed in HeinOnline, Manupatra & Google Scholar + 1000+ Libraries  ·  Free DOI Submit Now →
Chat with us