The Gazette 1908-9

DEC., 1908]

The Gazette of the|Incorporated Law Society of Ireland.

received from the council a paying order in their favour for £71 8s., being the amount of the compensation money, and also a paying order for ^4 i is. 4^., being the certified amount of their costs, and asking Messrs. Roche to hand over the completed receipt in exchange for these paying orders. Messrs. Roche replied on April 21, refusing to accept the paying order for ^4 us. \d. in satisfaction of their bill of costs. Messrs. Roche then wrote to the Secretary of the Local Government Board pro testing against the mode of measuring the costs, pointing out that it was not a taxation, and requiring that arrangements should be made to have the costs taxed on notice to them in a proper manner and in their presence. To this letter the Local Government Board replied on May 7, asserting that the costs had been taxed in pursuance of s. 31 of the Labourers (Ireland) Act, 1906, and of Rule 55 of the order made thereunder, and that in the arrangements they had made under the order they did not consider it necessary to put the claimants or rural councils to the expense of being represented by solicitors on the taxation of such bills of costs. Several further letters were written by Messrs. Roche to the Local Government Board protesting against the course that had been adopted, and demanding particulars of the deductions made in their bill of costs, and on June 4 the Local Government Board wrote to Messrs. Roche, stating it was not the usual practice of the Board to inform solicitors what deductions were made in certifv- ing their bills of costs, but in the present instance the secretary was directed to send a statement showing the deductions made. After perusing the list of deductions Messrs. Roche wrote again to the Local Government Board complaining that the deductions were not made according to the existing schedule of fees, and demanding that they should be in formed upon what scale or schedule of fees the bill of costs had been taxed. The Board gave no information as to the scale or schedule of fees, but on their memorandum referring the bill to Messrs. Mecredy were the words "new scale," which it appeared referred to a scale about to be introduced. Accordingly, on July 30, 1908, the applicant obtained a con ditional order to remove into the King's Bench Division for the purpose of being quashed the original certificate of taxation of the bill of costs for ^4 us. \d., dated April 13, 1908, made on the taxation of a bill of costs furnished March 28, 1908, upon the following grounds:— (i)That there was no taxation of the said

bill of costs by a legally constituted taxing authority, and that the Local Government Board could only certify after such legal taxa tion ; (2) that if Messrs. Mecredy were a legally constituted taxing authority, the Local Government Board could only certify for the amount ascertained by Messrs. Mecredy ; (3) that' if the sum of £4 us. ^d. truly repre sented the result of any taxation, such taxation was illegal, because it was not carried out under and according to the existing schedule of costs and fees or any legally prescribed schedule or scale regulating the costs and charges of solicitors ; (4) that the entire alleged taxation was illegal by reason of the solicitors for owners whose costs were being taxed having been excluded from attending or being present when such bill of costs was being taxed, and by reason of no subsequent opportunity having been given to them before such certificate was made up of explaining or justifying the items objected to or disallowed ; (5) that if the effect of Rule 55 of the Labourers (Ireland) Order, 1906, was to enable the Local Government Board to determine and fix the amount of costs payable to the ownerin respect of giving proof of title without referring such costs to a properly constituted taxing authority for taxation, or to enable the Local Govern ment Board to certify that the sum payable in respect of such costs was an amount different from the amount ascertained as the proper amount of such costs by a properly constituted taxing authority, said rule was ultra vires and void. The Local Government Board showed cause. GIBSON, J.:— This application for certiorari raises ques tions of difficulty and importance affecting the Labourers Act, 1906, rules thereunder, and the validity of a taxation of a vendor's- costs. The applicant contends—(i) that section 31 did not authorize the creation of a new taxing authority; (2) that Rule 55 was ullra vires, because it purports to create such taxing authority, because it purports to make the Board such authority, and because, if it does not, it purports to enable the Board to create a particular taxing authority in each case; (3) if Messrs. Mecredy were a lawful taxing authority, they were acting not on their own independent judicial responsibility, but under unlawful directions of the Board controlling them; (4) the taxation was invalid, as the vendor's solicitors were given no opportunity of defending their bill, and vouching same.