The Gazette 1958-61

Libel and Slander—Publication. In Truth (N.Z.) v. Holloway (July 26, 1960) a jury awarded a plaintiff damages in respect of an article which had appeared in the defendant's newspaper. In the course of his summing-up the trial judge had said : "It is not a defence at all that a statement that might be defamatory is put forward by way of report only." On appeal on the ground of misdirection, the Privy Council (Lords Simonds, Reid, Tucker, Denning and Morris) held, dismissing the appeal, that every republication of a libel was a new libel, and that each publisher was answerable for his act to the same extent as if the calumny originated with him. (D.C.) See also (1960) I.W.L.R. 997; 104 S.J. 745. FORMATION OF LIMITED COMPANIES In 1952 the Society was in communication with the Institute of Chartered Accountants and the other bodies representing the accountants' profession. It was agreed that the preparation of the memoranda and articles of association is properly the function of the legal profession and should be so regarded by members of the Institute of Chartered Accountants. The Council of the Society have been informed that a number of accountants, possibly through ignorance of the recommendation made by the Institute, have been acting in contravention of it by preparing ^ memoranda and articles of association. The Council of the Society are advised by counsel that the prepara tion of a memoranda and articles of association of a limited company by an unqualified person (i.e. a person other than a duly qualified solicitor or barrister) is in contravention of section 5 8 of the Solicitors Act 1954. Members of the Society are invited to submit to the Society any cases in which unqualified persons are known to have acted in contravention of the statute so that the particulars may be submitted for consideration to the appropriate professional bodies. PROPERTY VALUES (ARBITRATION AND APPEALS) ACT, 1960 The Property Values (Arbitration and Appeals) Act 1960 makes provision for the appointment of property arbitrators to exercise the powers and functions (i) of referees in relation to appeals under Part I of the Finance (1909-10) Act 1910 and (2) of arbitrators in relation to arbitrations under the Acquisition of Land (Assessment of Compensation) Act 1919 and under the Arterial Drainage Act 1945- The Reference Committee, consisting of the Chief Justice, the President of the High Court and the Chairman of the Surveyors' Institution (Irish 74

drug store. S. 2 of the Act of 1939 as amended defines "trade dispute" as "any dispute or difference between employers and workmen, or between workmen and workmen, connected with the employment or non-employment, or the terms of employment, or with the conditions of labour of any person." Held, allowing the appeal of the defendants other than J. and S., that these defendants were not vicariously liable for the acts of the pickets and, allowing in part the appeal of J. and S., there was a trade dispute, as (a) the clerk was a "workman", and (b) a dispute between a union and an employer could be a trade dispute. An injunction was granted to restrain J. and S. from continuing the nuisance and £80 damages awarded : Bird v. O'Neal (1960) 3 W.L.R. 584 ; 104 S.J. 725 ; (1960) 3 All E.R. 254 P.C. Executors and Administrators—Probate—Destruction of will of living person—Admission of copy to probate. In the estate of Penson (September 29 1960) solicitors destroyed the will of a living person, thinking it to have been the revoked will of a deceased person. The mistake was not discovered until after the living person had died. On a motion to admit a copy of the will to probate, the widow and four surviving children consented to' the motion. There were, however, two infant grandchildren who had an interest in the estate. No consent to the motion had been sought on their behalf. Buckley J., ordering that the copy of the will be admitted to probate, held that since the case was a clear one, the court should allow the contents of the will to be proved on motion, without the consent of the grandchildren. (D. C.) See also The Times, September 30, 1960. Husband and Wife—Action by Wife against Husband— 1960) Collingwood J. granted an injunction restraining a husband from molesting his wife and from going to her home, her parents' home or to the office of her solicitor, and from communicating with his wife or her aunts, cousins or parents or with her solicitor otherwise than by prepaid letter. On a summons to commit the husband to prison for contempt of court for breach of the injunction, Pennycuick J., dismissing the summons, ordered that the injunction be continued, pending the hearing of the divorce suit between the parties, but that it be varied to the extent that the husband be restrained from communi cating with the wife otherwise than by prepaid letter or with her written consent. (D.C.) See also The Times, September 16, 1960. Injunction against molesting. In Gordon v. Gordon (September 15