The Gazette 1967/71

(Lord Reid, Lord Morris, Lord Hodson, Lord

Appeal, Criminal Division (Winn L.J., Lawton

Guest and Lord Wilberforce].

and James J.J.]-

Use of White Marble on Headstones Where someone wishes a white marble headstone with a personal composition engraved on it erec– ted over a grave, it is incumbent upon the church and the court to weieh the arguments as to O whether marble and the inscription on it will thus be fit for posterity and whether the beauty of the church will be improved thereby. It was held that these conditions are not fulfilled there– fore a white marble stone was not allowed. [In re St. Peter, Kineton (1967), 1 W.L.R. 347. Ch. (GageJ.)]. Credit-Worthiness of Purchaser The plaintiff companies and the first defendant, R Ltd., which was an established company of good repute, carried on business as wholesalers in the Liverpool fruit and vegetable market; R Ltd. sometimes acted also as commission agents. The manager of a newly incorporated company, T Ltd., in April 1965 called on J, the manager of R Ltd., and bought some potatoes from R Ltd., for cash. J made no enquiry about T Ltd. In the following weeks T Ltd., bought more potatoes from R Ltd., but on credit. The market rule was that payment should be made within seven days after invoice. Some payments were made by T Ltd. to R Ltd., but the account fluctuated and at material times there was always more than £2,500 owing by T Ltd., to R Ltd., and in consequence of this Reid, R Ltd.'s sales– man and buyer, was not informed by J. or by R Ltd.'s book-keeper of the state of account with T Ltd. In May 1965 the method of business between R Ltd., and T Ltd., changed to a commission basis. Reid ordered potatoes from the plaintiffs, and sales were entered as, or amended to be, sales to T Ltd. In answer to enquiries made by four of the plaintiffs to Reid when he ordered potatoes for T Ltd., Reid replied in words such as "they are all right", which the court found to mean that T Ltd. was credit-worthy. Reid's replies were made in good faith without negligence on his part. But for J's and R Ltd.'s book-keeper's negligence in their handling of R Ltd.'s accounts, they would have known at the material times the extent of T Ltd.'s indebtedness to R Ltd. They did not, however, know this. T Ltd. became in– solvent and was unable to pay for potatoes pur– chased and delivered to T Ltd. by the four plain– tiffs. In an action by the four plaintiffs and others against R Ltd., Reid and J, for damages 35

3 to 1 the Red! The front part of a vehicle crossed the stopline at traffic lights when the light was green. When half its length was over the line the vehicle was obstructed by turning traffic and by the time it proceeded the lights had changed to red. It was held that it is an offence if any part of it crosses the line when the light is red even though the other part crossed when the light was green. (Road Traffic Act, 1960, and Regulations 34 (1) of the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions, 1964.) [Ryan v Smith (1967), 1 A.E.R. 611. Queen's Bench Division, Divisional Court (Lord Parker C.J., Winn L.J. and Widgery J-l. ' - Costs of Payment into Court A plaintiff in a county court action claimed £166 remuneration for work done and the defendant paid £75 into court in satisfaction of the claim. Subsequently the plaintiff amended his particulars of claim to add a claim for £400 for conversion. At the trial the plaintiff recovered £75 on his claim for remuneration plus £2 on his claim for conversion. The county court judge held that he was entitled to his costs as he had recovered more than the amount paid in. It was held on appeal that the payment in was made on the original claim so that as no more than the amount paid in was recovered on that claim the defendant was entitled to his costs after payment in. No order was made in respect of the costs of recovering the £2 on the de minimis principle. [Tingay v Harris and Another (1967), 2 W.L.R. 577; (1967), 1 A.E.R. 385, Court of Appeal, Civil Division (Davies, Russell and Sal– mon, L.JJ.]. Industrial -Injuries A determination of an industrial injuries com– missioner on a claim for injury benefit that the claimant had suffered personal injury caused by accident arising out of his employment is final and conclusive under the Act for the purposes both of claim to injury and disablement benefits. A medical appeal tribunal exceeds its jurisdiction in disregarding such a determination of a com– missioner. Decision of the Court of Appeal affirmed by the House of Lords. N.B. The current authority is the National Insurance Act, 1965. [Minister of Social Security v Amalgamated Engineering Union (1967), 1 A.E.R. 210. House of Lords