The Gazette 1955-58

The Report disclosed a welcome increase of nearly £100 in annual subscriptions, but otherwise the receipts differed little from those of last year, the Association's income being gross £2,352 35. ad. and nett, available for relief, £2,038 8s. yd. The sum of £2,153 IOS - 6d. was granted in relief, being the second largest pay-out for relief in any one year in the history of the Association, and the number of applicants for relief was considerably up on last year. The Chairman stressed the valuable work being done by the Association and its secretary Mr. McCarron, and strongly appealed to the profession for their support to our only professional charity. The need for the Association was more than ever apparent. Mr. Carrigan, in seconding the adoption of the, report, strongly endorsed Mr. O'Brien's appeal to the profession. The Report was duly adopted. The Chairman announced that Mr. Henry P. Mayne wished to resign from the office of Vice- Chairman. He paid tribute to the services rendered by Mr. Mayne to the Association as one of its oldest members. Mr. Dinnen B. Gilmore was elected Vice-Chairman and agreed to continue in the capacity of honorary Secretary. BAR ASSOCIATIONS County Galway Solicitors' Bar Association THE following officers and Council were elected for the year 1958 at the Annual General Meeting of the above Association, held in January :—President, James P. Glynn ; Vice-President, William B. Gavin; Hon. Secretary, Scan F. MacGiollarnath; Hon. Treasurer, William B. Alien. Council: Edward C. Cooke, Christopher P. Crowley, Dominick H. Keirns, Thomas A. O'Donoghue, Scan 0 hOrain, Daniel G. Shields. Dublin Solicitors' Bar Association A Meeting of the Council was held on Wednesday, 5th February, 1958. The Meeting learned with great regret of the recent death of Mr. Cecil Vanston, who had been a president of the Association, and at the time of his death was a member of the Council, and of the Circuit and District Court and Hire Purchase Rules Sub-committees. The Council tendered their, deepest sympathy to Mr. Vanston's widow. The Council observed a great improvement in the speed with which Grants of Probate and Adminis tration are now issued, and acknowledged the success tul efforts of the Probate Offber in this connection. The President reported that he and the Vice- President had attended a very enjoyable function as guests of the Southern Law Association.

Progress was reported on various other matters and the next meeting was fixed for Wednesday, 5th March, 1958. DECISIONS OF PROFESSIONAL INTEREST Umpire's discretion in award of costs upheld. Mr. Justice Diplock dismissed a motion by buyers. Heaven and Kesterton Ltd., to set aside an award, by an umpire, Mr. Norman A. G. Davies, in which he awarded the buyers £73 but ordered them to pay the total costs of the arbitration amounting to £179 los. By a contract dated March 8, 1957, the buyers ordered from the sellers various quantities and de scriptions of timber. When the goods were de livered a claim was made by the buyers relating to defects in quality in a number of the sizes of wood, which was quantified at some £450. There was also a claim to reject quantities of two particular sizes for failure to comply with contract specifica tions, and that part of the claim amounted to some £573. Arbitrators were appointed, and having failed to reach agreement they appointed Mr. Davies as umpire. It was alleged that the umpire had misconducted himself in that, in dealing with the costs of the refer ence, he did not exercise his. discretion in a proper judicial manner. Mr. Justice Diplock said that he had no doubt that an arbitrator in an arbitration of the present kind had power to deprive a successful claimant of his costs, and indeed to order him to pay the other side's costs in appropriate circumstances, and the mere fact that on the face of the award the buyers had succeeded in the sum of £73 and yet had been ordered to pay the costs would be no ground for setting aside the award. It was clear from the authorities cited to the Court first, that a court had jurisdiction where it appeared on the material before it that an arbitrator had exercised his discretion in a non-judicial manner, to set aside an order as to costs ; secondly, that it mattered not whether the material on which the Court came to the decision appeared on the tace of the award or from affidavits. While therefore it might be that, had the umpire not put in an affidavit and not given his reasons the buyers would not have been able to urge that the order for costs should be set aside, as the umpire had given his reasons his Lordship was entitled to look at those reasons and to ascertain whether he had exercised his discretion judicially or not. The umpire stated in his affidavit that in coming ro his decision on costs he had regard to all the facts and circumstances of the case including (a) that he 79