The Gazette 1967/71
. . . used solely in connection with agricultural opera tions thereon" within the definition in section 2 (2) of the Rating and Valuation (Apportionment) Act 1928. W. & R. J. Eastwood Ltd. v. Herrod (Valuation Officer), House of Lords 25/2/'70. Redundancy A mineworker who worked a seven-day week for 20 years and then, when helping to rundown the colliery, worked and was paid for a five-day week, was entitled to redundancy payment based on a seven-day week, their Lordships decided when allowing an appeal by Mr. Clement Saxton and three other mineworkers of Barnsley from the Industrial Tribunal at Leeds. The tribunal had calculated the payment on a five-day week basis when giving a decision last November that the men were not entitled to further redundancy payments from the National Coal Board. Sexton and Others v. National Coal Board, Q.B.D. When considering a collision at sea between two ships, the Court held that section 1 of the Maritime Conven tions Act, 1911, was mandatory in stating that liability to make good the damage or loss should be in propor tion to the degree in which each vessel is at fault, pro vided that if it is not possible to establish different degrees of fault the liability should be apportioned equally. The court must apportion liability unless it was impossible to do so. The Anneliese Court >f Appeal ll/3/'70. Solicitor—Professional Negligence There is no duty on a solicitor acting for a firm to communicate his advice to all the partners; it is sufficient if he tenders his advice to the partner dealing with the matter. A solicitor acting for a client in negotiations for a lease of premises is under a duty to draw the attention of his client to any unusual clause that may affect the client's interest, even if the client is a pro fessional man experienced in property transactions. But even if a solicitor has negligently failed to draw his client's attention to an unusual clause, his client cannot recover more than nominal damages for breach of con tract if he would probably have entered into the lease anyhow and ignored proper advice had it been given. Sykes v. Midland Bank Executor & Trustee Co. Ltd. Tax A tax appeal involving back duty assessments stretch ing back to 1942-43 was remitted to a fresh panel of general commissioners for a completely new hearing be cause the original panel had refused an application for adjournment on the ground of the taxpayer's ill-health after a coronary thrombosis and a further operation. Rose v. Humb!es (Inspector for Taxes). Chancery Division 9/3/'70. Trade Name Park Court Hotel Ltd., the plaintiffs, who own Hotel rani >_,ouri not i .Lt ., tn laintiffs, who own Hotel International in Lancaster Gate, S.W , were refused an interlocutory injunction to restrain Trails-World Hotels 10/3/70. Shipping
they were a delimitation on the general right of pro perty. (Central Dublin Development Association v. Attorney General—Kenny J.—unreported)—6th October 1969. Where Parliament has enacted two different ways of preventing development which would interfere with road widening schemes, one of which, under the Highways Acts, provides for immediate payment of compensation to the deprived frontager, and the other, under the Town and Country Planning Acts, which does not pro vide for compensation, a local authority is acting within its powers if it refuses planning permission to a property owner without compensation, on the ground that his land may be required for a proposed road widening scheme. Westminster Berk Ltd. v. Ministers of Housing and Local Government, House of Lords 26/2/'70. Practice Transfer of Prisoner Accused found guilty of charge and sentenced to three years imprisonment. The Supreme Court, per O'Dalaigh, C. J., held: 1. That the Order of the Minister for Justice, trans ferring the accused from St. Patrick's Institution to Port Laoise Prison was bad, because the Minister had exceeded his jurisdiction, on the basis that he had stated in his Order that the boy, then 18 years of age, was incorrigible. The Visiting Com mittee's Report did not refer to this but only to "bad influence". 2. The Visiting Committee must not merely state their conclusions in relation to a prisoner but give reasons for their conclusions—in order to enable the Minister to exercise his discretion properly. The State (Brien) v. Governor of Portlaoise—Sup reme Court—Unreported—9th May 1968. Rating The plaintiffs claimed rates in respect of transit sheds owned by Defendants. Since 1903, the Defendants have paid rates on sheds treated as warehouses, and allocated to particular shipping lines, but they had not paid any rates on transit sheds available to general users in the port. In order to enable vessels to discharge cargo rapidly and leave the port, the defendants entered into a bond with the customs authorities whereby goods are deposited in the sheds without customs examination, and may subsequently be withdrawn after such examina tion. The President, Mr. Justice O'Keeffe, having examined the legal authorities in detail reached the conclusion that the plaintiff's claim was not admissible, because the defendants must put these sheds at the disposal of the public, and cannot consequently be in occupation of them. Dublin Corporation v. Dublin Port and Docks Board— unreported—14th May 1969. About a hundred buildings used in combination with 1,150 acres of land for the commercial enterprise of rearing broiler chickens on a wholesale scale are not PYi»mr>t' frnm m 1 1 ncr Kf»r*a i ic^ tV»
Made with FlippingBook