The Gazette 1967/71

(B.C.L.), Daniel M. Gahan, Barry St. John Galvin (B.C.L.), Michael Gleeson (B.C.L.), Blayney C. Hamilton, Andrew W. Healy, Desmond P. Hogan, Mary Carmel Kelly, James D. Lavery (B.C.L., LL.B.), MicheHe M. Linnane (B.A. (Mod) LL.B.), Michael J. D. Mangan (B.C.L.), John P. Mathews (B.C.L., LL.B.), John J. Murphy (B.C.L.), Patrick Harmon Muriagh (B.A. (Mod)), Roger W. A. MacGinley (B.A.), Stephen J. MacKenzie (B.C.L.), Donough H. O'Connor (B.C.L., LL.B.), Fachtna O'Driscoll (B.C.L.), James M. O'Dwyer (B.C.L.), Michael O'Hanarhan (B.A.), Timothy N. O'Han- rahan, Raymond M. O'Neill, Rose Maeve O'Regan (B.C.L.), James O'Reilly (B.C.L., LL.B.), Anthony F. O Rourke (B.C.L.), Robin A. Peilow (B.A.), Elizabeth A. Purcell, Esmond Reilly, Niall Edward Sheehy (B.C.L., LL.B.). 41 candidates attended; 38 passed. On the combined results of the Second and Third Law Examinations the Council has awarded a Silver Medal to Patrick J. McCarthy (B.A.). GOING TOO FAR? "I recently received an Air Letter from a firm of advocates in Tanzania briefly acknowledging my letter and stating that the partner concerned 'is at present on safari but will be contacting you upon his return' ". (The Solicitors Journal). BAR MEETINGS Not every Dubliner appreciated the significance of the gathering of 1,500 Lawyers from 53 countries'who attended the Twelfth Conference of the International Bar Association in Ireland last July. A local lady selling post cards at Trinity College, asked two visitors who were wearing name badges, what meeting they were attending. On being told she commented "You must be a boozy lot when you all get together". The lady was under the imprression that her City was giving hospitality to the International Barmans Conference! (Solicitors Journal 1968 Vol. 112, P. 580). CASES OF THE MONTH Criminal Law, Order of proceedings. The appelant was charged with breaking and entering contrary to Larceny Act 1916 section 27 (2) and on conviction was sentenced to six months imprisonment. The Defendant had a medical witness present. The District Justice had

insisted that the medical witness be called before the prosecutions case had been completed. The object of his so doing was to cause as little inconvenience as possible to the Doctor. On the Appeal it was indicated that the evidence given by this witness was irrelevant. The President of the High Court had made an Order of Certiorari: the Attorney General ap pealed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court indicated that the insistance of the District Justice in calling the Defence witness before the termination of the prosecution case was a violation of a basic principle of Justice and the resulting conviction could not be allowed to stand. State (O'Connor) v Larkin, D. J. Supreme Court, 19/11/68. Costs undertaking by solicitor The Plaintiff and the Defendant had acted in succession in a matter in which Richard Tynan had been awarded his costs against the Attorney General. When the Bill of Costs had been taxed but before it was paid the Plaintiff claimed that he had a lien on the amount of the taxed costs in respect of the work done by him in earlier proceedings for the prosecutor. The Attorney General lodged the moneys in the High Court and the parties now sought to establish their right to the same. The Plaintiff subsequently changed his plea and claimed on the grounds: (1) that the Defendant had given him his personal undertaking to discharge fees in respect of services in earlier litigation. (2) that the costs recovered in the Stateside matter should in equity be paid to him. Both claims were rejected. [n regard to (1) the Undertaking had been given "on behalf of his client" and was not a personal undertaking. In the High Court Mr. Justice Kenny took the view that had the Defendant given his undertaking it would, as both were Oflicers of the Court, be the Courts duty to enforce it. He was satisfied that no such undertaking had been given. It was held on Appeal to the Supreme Court that the undertaking was not a personal undertaking but was expressly on behalf of the client. Accord ingly it was given as agent not as principal; even if there had been a personal undertaking the remedy was not against the moneys lodged in Court but in an action for breach of contract. Concannon v Bradshaw, Supreme Court, 30/1/69. 121