The Gazette 1967/71

with the Netherlands Universities Foundation for International Co-operation, will be held for the second consecutive time from 18th to 30th August 1969. Participation is open to graduates in law and law students in their final year. The medium of instruction is English. Full information can be obtained from the Netherlands University Foun dation for International Go-operation, 27 Molen- straat, The Hague, Netherlands. SOLICITORS ACT, 1954 Apprenticeship and Education (Amendment) Regulations 1969 These regulations, which came into force on 12th June 1969, prescribe that commerce is to be in cluded as an additional optional subject for the Preliminary Examination. CASES OF THE MONTH Negligence: preliminary decision as to issue triable whether Home Office is negligent for theft of yacht by boys escaping from Borstal The Home Office maintained a Borstal institution from which a number of boys escaped. They boar ded the plaintiff's yacht, cast her adrift, and caused considerable damage to the yacht and its contents. It was alleged by the plaintiffs that the defendants, the Home Office, were liable for the damage caused owing to their negligence in failing to exercise effective control or supervision over the boys. It was also alleged as a preliminary point that the Home Office owed a duty of care to the plaintiff capable of giving rise to liability for dam ages as regards the effective detention of the boys, and the manner in which they were to be em ployed, disciplined, controlled and supervised. It was held that in appropriate circumstances such a liability could exist. The plaintiffs had claimed that there was a breach of the common law duty to take care on the assumption that the damage caused could have been foreseen, and that consequently the defendants were liable at com mon law for the negligent exercise of their duty by their servants in supervising the boys. Accord ingly the case ought to proceed on the basis of ascertaining whether in the particular circum stances there had been a lack of reasonable care on the part of the defendant. Dorset Yacht Co. v the Home Office (1969) 2 W.L.R. 100S—C. A. (Lord Denning M.R. Edmund Davies and Phiblimore, L.JJ).

Insurance: failure to notify insurers of accident The defendant Robles had driven his car danger ously, with the result that the car had collided with plaintiff's house. Contrary to a condition in his insurance policy, he did not notify his insurers of the accident and claim within the prescribed five days. When proceedings were instituted against him, he denied liability and joined the insurers as third parties. The Court considered the effect of the defen dant's failure to notify his insurers. It was held that the insurance company had an unlimited right to repudiate or accept liability as they thought fit, but they must make up their minds within a reasonable time. In this case, they had been informed of the claim in July 1967, but did not repudiate liability until the 29th November 1967. It was consequently held that more than a reasonable time had elapsed. The company had thus lost their right to election, and to an indem nity from the defendant. Alien v Robles, The Times, 20th May 1969. Licensing: Intoxicating Liquor Act, 1960 Section 14 of the Intoxicating Liquor Act, 1960, provides for applications for licences in respect of premises to which no licence is attached, and applies where premises have been demolished within two years of the application and new prem ises are erected located on the site of the original premises, or, "if they are not so located, that they are located either partly on that site or in the immediate vicinity. In. this instance, as the new premises were removed a distance of seven hundred and thirty-three yards from the old premises by the most convenient route, the application had been dismissed in the Dublin Circuit Court by Judge Conroy. On appeal to the High Court, McLoughlin J., indicated that his inclination was to accede to such applications, but that no evi dence had been given which satisfied him that the new premises were in the immediate vicinity of the original premises. The application was accordingly refused. Irish Cinemas Ltd. (applicants) in re Intoxi cating Liquor Act, 1960, High Court, 8th Nov. 1968. Road Traffic Act, 1961: defective summons The defendant was charged, convicted, sentenced and fined in his absence with furnishing particulars which were false and misleading on an application for a licence. On appeal by way of certiorari to the Supreme Court it was held, affirming Kenny, 24