The Gazette 1967/71

Mr. Justice Plowman upheld the legality of an order giving the drivers of fire appliances a discretion whether to " jump" red traffic lights in an emergency, and dis missed an application by Mr. W. W. Buckoke and 19 other firemen employed by the Greater London Council that the order be withdrawn and disciplinary proceedings against them stayed. Buckoke and Others v. Greater London Council. Ch. Div. 23/3/70. Tax Where income is received by trustees it is for surtax purposes the income of the beneficiaries, even though they have not received it and may never receive it. Where the court makes an order under the Variation of Trusts Act, 1928, it is carrying out an administrative function, and it would be only in exceptional circumstances that an estoppel per rem judicatam was raised ; there was no estoppel in respect of issues never raised before the court. Spers v. Inland Revenue Commissioners. Holdsworth Hunt v. Same. Ch. Div. 24/2/70. Mini-vans, Morris 1000 vans, Austin A35 vans and Bedford 6 cwt. vans were held to qualify for investment allowances in two tax appeals. One panel of special commissioners had granted the allowances to Granada T.V. Rentals Ltd. and another panel had refused them to S. & U. Stores Ltd. for years of assessment before 1966-67. Although investment allowances were stopped in 1966, the same test applies to initial allowances under section 18(3) of the Capital Allowances Act, 1968, which reenacts section 37(1) of the Finance Act, 1966. Robert (Inspector of Taxes) v. Granada T.V. Rentals Ltd. S. & U. Stores Ltd. v. Gordon (Inspector of Taxes). Ch. Div. 18/3/70. Words and Phrases In the first reported English case since 1838 on the meaning of " male descendants ", the court held thit the phrase means males descended in any manner, including descent through females, and is not restricted to males descended in an exclusivelv male line. In re Drake (deceased). C. of A. 39/4/70. LIBRARY ACQUISITIONS TO 1st APRIL 1970 (1) PURCHASES ABRAHAM (L. A.) and S. C. HAWTREY— A Parliamentary Dictionary, 2nd Edition, 1964. ABRAHAMSON (MAX)—Engineering Law and the Institute of Civil Engineering Contracts, 2nd Edition, 1969 (Two copies). ALL ENGLAND LAW REPORTS Index and Noter-up, 1966-68 and 1966-69. ANSON, see Guest. ATKIN (Lord)—Encyclopaedia of Court Forms in Civil Proceedings—2nd (Evershed) edition— Volume 3 (Admiralty and Affidavits). Volume 136

that the Motor Insurers' Bureau were not bound to compensate her in respect of a judgment which she Obtained against the driver of a motor car following a fatal accident to her husband while he was a passenger in it. The driver had been insured with the Fire, Auto and Marine. Insurance Co. Ltd. Albert v. Motor Insurers' Bureau. C. of A. 22/4/70. Practice When a writ naming two defendants is served on only one of two or more defendants within 12 months of the date of issue it is not valid after 12 months for the purpose of service on the other defendant without an order for renewal, pursuant to Order 6 rule 8 (2) of the Rules of the Supreme Court. In the circumstances of the present case, the Court held that the judge had correctly exercised his discretion in extending the time for service of the writ. The Court dismissed an appeal by a second defendant from a decision of Mr. Justice Chapman in chambers on February 2, when he extended the time of service of a writ which had been properly served on the first defendant within 12 months of issue. Jones v. Jones and Another. C. of A. 22/4/70. Chief Justice can direct composition of Supreme Court The Supreme Court Appeal, in the case of Pielow v. Ffrench O'Carroll, was heard, by direction of the Chief Justice, by Haugh, Budd and Fitzgerald J. J. in July 1968, judgment was reserved, and, as a result of the death of Mr. Justice Haugh, the Court was re-constituted by the addition of McLoughlin J. Counsel for defendant submitted that his client was, of right, entitled to have the appeal re-argued before the full Court, and submitted arguments in support thereof. The full Supreme Court, per O''Dalaigh C. J., Held that by virtue of Section 7(3) and 7(4) of the Courts (Supplementary Provisions) Act 1961, as the case raised no constitutional issue, the com position of the court had been placed in the sole deter mination of the Chief Justice. The appeal was accordingly dismissed. Pielow v. Ffrench O'Carroll (No. i)—Unreported— I3th November 1969. Road Traffic Acts If a motorist on a road once uses a car with defective tyres on two wheels he is committing two offences, their Lordships held when allowing a police appeal from the dismissal by Colchester justices last November, of an information charging Phillip Andrew Woodhouse, St. Andre's Road, Sudbury, Suffolk, with driving a motor car in contravention of section 64 of the Road Traffic Act, 1960, and Regulation 83 (i) of the Motor Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations, 1969 [S.I 1969 No. 321! in that the near offside tyre was unsuitable having regard to the use to which the car was being put or to the other types of tyres fitted to the other wheels. Saines v. Woodhouse. Q.B.D. 22/4/70. Where the primary facts are not in dispute, the question whether a person is driving or attempting to drive within the meaning of section 2 of the Road Safety Act, 1967, is one of law to be decided by the trial judge and is not suitable to be left to the jury, the Court held when allowing an appeal by Francis Kelly against a conviction at South West London Sessions last July for driving with an excess proportion of alcohol in his blood,

contrary to section 1(1) of the Act. Regina v. Kelly. C. of A. 14/4/70.