The Gazette 1927-30

, 1927

The : Gazette of the Incorporated Law Society of Ireland; '

17

Solicitor, .died ' ' '* Obituary: ; MR. EDWARD D^'&UNT upon the 4th July, 1927: :' Mr. Hunt was admitted in ttilary Sittings, 1894, and 'practised at Limerick. MR. FRANCIS G. MACSHERRY, Solicitor, died upon the 13th July, 1927, at Victoria Villa, Downpatrick. Mr'.' MacSherry served his apprenticeship with Mr. John W. Bell, Downpatrick ; was admitted in Hilary Sittings, 1902, and practised at Roscommon. New Members. The following have joined the Society :— Francis S. Collins, 21 St. Andrew Street, Dublin. Augustine S. McBreen, Bailieborough. Recent Legal Decision. HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE (ENGLAND). KING'S BENCH DIVISION. < Solicitors' Duty to Insured Motorists. WALSH v. JULIUS WHITE AND BYWATERS. (Before the Lord Chief Justice and a Special Jury.) Mr. Walsh's case was that in December, 1925, he was insured against third-party risks with the Motor Manufacturers' and Traders' Mutual Insurance Company, Limited, and that on December 26, 1925, a Mrs. Clara Sidders suffered injury through coming into contact with his- taxicab' in the South Lambeth Road, S.W. Mr. Walsh. notified the insurance company of the accident, and in January, 1926, of the fact that Mrs. Sidders had begun proceedings against him. In February, 1926, the defendants undertook the defence of the action on the instructions of the insurance company, but he alleged they failed to take certain steps and to attend certain summonses, with' the result that interlocutory judgment was signed against him, the damages being later assessed at £65 and the costs taxed-at £58 odd. In July the Sheriff entered Mr. Walsh's premises and

seized his'gooffs tb-sati'sfy flse- Mr. Walsh'hadto : ii)ay'him;i£72 odd •'•-The defendarits'denied-'any^negligeWce'br bfeach1 of'' duty;' and 'pleaded' :that'- ttey • -naW riot "been retained by or- on • be%alf -bf'-Mf.1 Walsh'and had not owed him any'duty-.' Alternatively, the}' said that they were riot provided with the necessary fund's'-'to: continue the defence of the action, and,' therefore, they had lawfully discharged themselves from the retainer. In July, 1928; the insurance company was'wound up'.' "•••• During counsel's speeches at the conclusion of the evidence, his ; Lordship pbirite'd1 out that from first to last there had not been one ; word of imputation on the honour 'or; the" honesty of the defendants. .,'' ;''•' ''"* The Lord Chief Justice; in summing^'up;''• .referred to the defendants' contention thaty in the circumstances of the case,'the- relation- ship of solicitor and client never existed •' between them and Mr. Walsh. The position in which Mr. Walsh had'found himself'Xvas, he said, that in which every person 'who was' insured against third-party risks- under a- common policy of insurance,, found himself when an accident occurred. 'If an authorita tive pronouncement of the law were necessary it was that it mattered not that a solicitor was introduced to a person by A, B, or C, or whether he was appointed to-'act directly by that person, or by. some individual, firm, or company who was acting as/that person's,, agent for the purpose. When, ; a ^solicitor, undertook the burden and. the,duty of acting, in proceedings in the name and on behalf of a person the relationship , of solicitor arid client was established between the solicitor and that person. '..:•'•' :.•;:..>'„• ; If it were otherwise, what could be'more inconvenient to use no harsher epithet than for a solicitor to begin or to1 defend.- pro ceedings in the name of and on behalf, of a person who was riot his client1—not only -from the point of view of that person but also from that of the other party to the action ? At every stage of proceedings if a party were not acting in person his solicitor' Was the .person on whom documents were served and to whom notices were given. If the solicitor were acting with- due and proper - diligence when notices were received and • documents were delivered he took the proper steps on