The Gazette 1955-58

SMALL DWELLINGS ACQUISITION ACT, 1957 THIS Act amends the definition of market value of a house for the purpose of the Small Dwellings Acquisition Act 1899, previously set out in Section 32 of the Housing (Amendment) Act 1950. This market value is now to include the cost of building the house (including all reasonable incidental ex penses), and the value of the interest of the person to whom the advance is made in respect of the site. Where the ownership of the house is occupied by the person to whom the advance is made, he shall be entitled to all reasonable expenses incidental to such acquisition. This provision is retrospective to the 24th December, 1956. If an applicant is dissatisfied with the amount awarded by the local authority under this Act, such applicant may, upon payment of the prescribed fee laid down by regulations, submit his contention that he is entitled to a greater amount. The Com missioner, after having made the necessary inquiries, shall state whether or not he considers the conten tion well founded, and, if applicable,will state the amended amount which should be awarded. A statement from the Commissioner of Valuation shall not, however, affect the discretion of the local authority in the matter. MARRIED WOMENS STATUS ACT, 1957 The Married Womens' Status Act 1957 came into force on ist June, 1957, and briefly places a married woman, in respect of owning property, or making contracts, or committing torts, on the same footing as if she were unmarried ; for most of these purposes she is henceforth to be treated as a separate person from her husband. The doctrine of restraint upon anticipation is abolished. It is understood that copies of the Act which contains 21 sections, will be shortly on sale in the Government Publications Sale Office, G.P.O. Arcade, Henry Street, Dublin. INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL PROPERTY (AMENDMENT) ACT, 1957 THIS Act implements the Industrial Property Convention of London of 1934, and the Copyright Conventions of Brussels in 1948, and of Geneva in 1952. Amendments are made to the 1927 Act in respect of the following matters :— (a) Granting and sealing of patents. (b) Prevention of abuse of monopoly rights. (i) Patents of vessels, aircraft, and land vehicles accidentally landing in the State. (*/) Cancellation of registration of designs. 40

not pay if they lose ? The justices need not have appeared. At one time this court very seldom ordered costs, and I think that the reason was that the Act of 1872 got overlooked. For at least three years now I have been trying to remind justices of the presence of this Act on the Statute Book. I have said over and over again that, if justices are not content with exercising the power which Parliament has given them but will insist on appear- and arguing the case, they will make themselves parties to a lis and will have to pay costs if they lose, and if they win they will receive them. Note:— Although the Review of Justices Decisions Act, 1872, does not appear to have been formally repealed in Ireland, it would appear to have been impliedly repealed by the Courts of Justice Acts, because it is understood that if a decision of a District Justice is impugned the Attorney-General instructs the Chief State Solicitor and nominates Counsel to appear on the Justice's behalf. The question of the District Justice having to pay costs personally would not thus normally arise. (R. v. Llanidloes Licensing Justices—Ex parte Davies—(1957) 2 All E.R. 6iol)) Solicitor, practising on his own tinder the name of a firm\ can deliver a bill of costs signed in the name of the firm. The Case of Carroll v. Ryan heard by Judge Deale at Trim Circuit Court in June, 1937, gave rise to an interesting legal point. Judge Deale declined to follow the English decision of Goodman v. Eban (1954, I.Q.B. 550), as the wording of the English Solicitors Act was different, and held that in a claim by a solicitor against a client for non-payment of his bill of costs amounting to £131, that, owing wording of Section 2 of the Solicitor's (Ireland) Act, 1849, t^6 solicitor should have signed the bill of costs in his own name, and not in the firm name where he was the sole owner of the firm. Section 2 of the Act provides inter alia " that the bill shall be subscribed with the proper hand of . . . such solicitor." As Judge Deale was of opinion that the bill had not been subscribed in accordance with the Act, he dismissed the action. An appeal was taken to the High Court on circuit. Haugh, J., in allowing the appeal held that, while he was not bound to follow the reasoning in Goodman v. Eban, he thought nevertheless it would be preferable to do so in this case and held that the bill which had been signed by the solicitor with the firm name had been properly subscribed. By way of obiter dictum, Haugh, J., stated that it would be preferable as far as possible for the solicitor con cerned to sign the bill of costs in his own name, instead of in the name of the firm.