The Gazette 1967/71

expenses recoverable from a third party, except at the discretion of the Board. In practice, however, it is invariably our policy to pay benefit in these cases, on receipt of an undertaking from the sub scriber, or his legal representative, that the amount of benefit will be refunded, if and when it is recovered from a third party. I enclose a specimen of our claim form and would like to draw your attention to the form of undertakng which appears on the reverse side. Yours sincerely, R. M. Graham. Claims Manager. CASES OF THE MONTH Road traffic, careless driving, misleading signal The defendant was driving along a major road and his flashing indicator indicated that he in tended to turn left. A police car which was wait ing in a minor road began to move forward in reliance on the signal but the defendant drove straight on and an accident resulted. The defen dant was charged with careless driving; he con tended that the police car should not have relied on the indicator signal but should have waited until the defendant began to turn. The justice dismissed the information. Held, allowing the prosecutor's appeal that it was clearly careless driving to give misleading signals and the Justices would be directed to convict. [Another v Probert (1968) Grim. L.R. 564]. Road traffic, negligence A Jaguar car travelling on a wide main road at 55 rn.p.h. collided with a Ford Prefect travelling on a side road at an intersection. The driver and the passenger in the Ford were killed and a pass enger who was seriously injured raised an action for damages in the Court of Session against the heirs of the Ford driver and the driver of the Jaguar. It was held that the driver of the Ford was wholly to blame. After fully" reviewing the authori ties on the duties of the respective drivers on main and side roads the Lord Ordinary refused to hold that a driver on a main road has a duty when approaching a junction with a minor road upon which another vehicle can be seen approach ing the junction, to slow down and be ready to stop if the driver in the minor road drives across his path unless there is something in the conduct

of the vehicle on the minor road to give him some timely warning of the risk. [Rammage v Hardie and others (1968 S.L.T. note 54)]. Payment out of Court in error Judgment creditors obtained a garnishee order nisi against a bank, garnisheeing monies at the bank standing to the credit of the judgment debt ors, and the bank paid into court the amount of the judgment debt. In error the County Court Registry issued to the creditors the wrong form of notice of payment in, and the creditors, acting on the form obtained payment out, whereas the money ought to have stayed in court until the hearing of the garnishee summons. The judgment creditors appealed from an order of the County Court Judge that they should repay into court the money paid out to them in error. Held by the Court of Appeal who dismissed the appeal that a County Court Judge had inherent jurisdiction to recall money that had been paid out by mistake of fact or law; the creditors must therefore pay back the money into court. [Gainsborough Mixed Concrete Ltd. v Duplex Petrol Installations Ltd. (1968) 3 All E.R. 267]. Title by finding—personal property The plaintiffs were executors of R's estate who had hidden some £1 notes in a biscuit tin in his home. He sold the house to the defendant and the money was discovered by one of the defendant's workmen. R sued to recover it. He died during the course of the proceedings and the action was continued by his executors. It was held allowing the plaintiff's claim and applying a dictum of Parke B. in Meery v Green (1835-42) All E.R. Rep., at p. 283 that R had never got rid of the ownership of the notes, and his title to the money continued, not only as against the actual finder, but as against the owner of the land on which they were found. [Moffatt and another v Kazana (1968) 3 All E.R. 271]. Company law, private company, veto of transfers The Articles of Association of a private company provided that the directors might at any time in their absolute and uncontrolled discression refuse to register any transfer of shares (thus conforming with Table A, Part 2, the Irish Companies Act, 1963). The quorum of directors for the trans action of business was two, but a continuing direc tor could act for the purpose of increasing the 67