The Gazette 1964/67

sory purchase order over property in the line of the ring road and made an order stopping-up a number of streets. In one of the streets concerned, Coombe Street, the plaintiff had his garage, and after the stopping-up of Coombe Street, and the carrying out of roadworks there, the plaintiff's premises came to be situated at the end of a cul- de-sac, part of his garage frontage was lost and one exit from his forecourt was blocked. That adversely affected his business and the value of his premises as premises. The plaintiff sought a declaration that he was entitled to compensation under s.63 of the Land Clauses Consolidation Act, 1945. The defendants contended that the premises had not been injuriously affected, or that if they had this was the result, not of the defendants' roadwords, but of the stopping-up of the highway by order of the Minister, and that if compensation was in fact payable, it was the Minister, not they, who should pay it. It was held, that the step taken by the Minister was only because the defendants sought him to take such measures, and the defendants were responsible in all for the consequences of that step. By reason of that responsibility the defend ants were liable to pay compensation to the plain tiff as one whose premises had been injurisouly affectetd by the authorised street works carried out by the defendants in the course of which the stopping-up of Coombe Street was merely an incident and from which it could not be isolated. (Jolliffe v. Exeter Corporation, The Times, November 11, 1966).

book. Consequently the defendant did not get a good title. (Pearson v. Rose & Young Ltd. (1951) 1 K.B. 275, C.A., applied). (George v. Revis, The Times, 8/11/66). Bailment — Duty of Care A case of dresses was stolen from a dock shed whilst in the custody of a firm of master porters. The owners of the case brought an action against them alleging that they were guilty of negligence in that they had failed to take reasonable care of it. It was held (C.A. : Sellers, Danckwerts and Salmon L.JJ. : June 8, 1966) (affirming the de cision of Judge Stansfield given at Liverpool County Court) that the master porters were liable. It was not sufficient for them to prove that the system of looking after the goods was impeccable. Part of the system was to have a watchman on duty in the shed. They had to show that the watchman had carefully performed his duty and this they had not done. There was ample evidence to justify the finding that the watchman had not been sufficiently vigilant. (Global Dress Co. Ltd. v. W. H. Boase & Co. Ltd. (1966) 2 Lloyd's Reports, page 72). Costs for Removal of Fallen Tree In Williams v. Devon County Council the appellant highway authority claimed a sum of £30-10-10 from the respondent, that being the cost to the appellants of removing a tree which had been blown down in a high wind from the respondent's land and had fallen across the high way. Section 9 (1) (c) of the Highway (Miscel laneous Provisions) Act, 1961 entitles a highway authority to recover the cost of removing arj obstruction of a highway from the owner of the obstructing thing, except where the owner "proves that he took reasonable care to secure that the thing in question did not cause or contribute to the obstruction." The respondent had regularly inspected the tree and was satisfied that it was not likely to fall. Held—an owner of a tree which fell on a high way was not to be liable to pay the highway authority for its removal merely because the high way authority, in fulfilment of their clear duty, removed it before the owner could do so. (Williams v. Devon County Council, The Times, November 9, 1966). Compensation Arising from Road Works Exeter Corporation wished to construct a ring road and for that purpose the Minister of Trans port, at their instigation, confirmed a compul­

THE REGISTRY Registry B

Solicitor in practice seeks assistantship conveyancing or otherwise. West or Midlands preferred, to continue in practice.—Box B283.

Registry C

In the Goods of ANNIE C. WHOOLEY, late of 11, Lower Friars Walk, Cork, Spinster, Deceased. WILL any solicitor having knowledge as to the existence or otherwise of any Will made by the above-named deceased, who died on the 6th November, 1P66, please communicate with the undersigned. DANIEL G. MCCARTHY, Solicitor, SKIBBEREEN, CO. CORK. -,62