The Gazette 1967/71

plaintiff : but rejected by Supreme Court—Trade Disputes Act not applicable—Appeal dismissed. (10th April, 1967). 3. Sterling Winthrop Group Ltd. v. Farben- Fabriken Bayer, A-G. Appeal against interlocutory injunction of Kenny J. restraining defendants until after full judgment from distributing in Ireland any chemical pro ducts, for medical use named "Bayer"—plaintiff? contend that defendants goods if sold would lead to confusion—defendants must not pass off their goods as plaintiffs—plaintiffs do not claim their product to be German—Supreme Court held most people believe that plaintiffs goods are defendants'. The plaintiff is primarily responsible for the con fusion—Appeal allowed—Interlocutory injunction discharged. (1st May, 1967). 4. /. & L. S. Goodbody Ltd. v. Clyde Shipping Company. Order for leave to deliver interrogatories ten out of twenty-five allowed by Murnaghan J.—appeal to allow other fifteen—defendants contracted to watch a cargo of jute in a dockside shed in Water- ford—Murnaghan J. justified in allowing inter rogatories 1, 3-6, 7-17, and 20. Appeal allowed by Supreme Court holding that interrogatories at a special pre-trial procedure should be encouraged. (9th May, 1967). 5. Mullan v. Doyle. The plaintiff, a nurse in County Leitrim, a plain tiff pillon passenger on motercycle which was in collision with defendant's motorcar in Bundoran. Proceedings instituted in February, 1963—notice to serve motor-cyclist defendant granted in March, 1965, when other defendants denied liability— motor-cyclist issued separate action against de fendants claiming personal injury in May, 1965— in December, 1965, upon an application by the defendants for a summons for directions Mur naghan J. ordered that the third party order be set aside— the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, on the ground that multiplicity could be avoided by joining the motor-cyclist as a third defendant, and granted the summons for directions. (10th May, 1967). 6. Dolan v. Neligan. Claim by plaintiff for £19,200 customs duty for imported Baby Cham—duty charged under head ing "Perry" plus duty on spirit content. It was decided that duty was only payable for Perry— plaintiff made overpayments to clear goods from customs and subsequently claimed refund—Kenny J., while holding that plaintiff could recover for a

mistake of law, also held that the plaintiff had not availed of the statutory procedure under the Customs Consolidation Act, 1876 and dismissed the claim. The Supreme Court held, that in the event of an overpayment, unless it were clearly stated that the money lodged was a deposit under the Customs Acts, it should not be deemed to be so—the fact that the plaintiff paid the duty did not automatically invoke Customs Acts procedure. The customs have statuory power to repay any monies overpaid in error—the statute is manda tory and does not merely confer a discretion, provided the claim is made within six years— Appeal allowed and judgment entered for plain tiff for full amount, (llth May, 1967). 7. Corr v. Bradshaw. The plaintiff-occupier of house in Dalkey claims a full right of way for vehicles from rear of house to Harbour Road,—Defendants contend right of way limited to pedestrians—Kenny J. granted the plaintiff full right of way with vehicles—Supreme Court there was ample evidence to justify plain tiff's contention, and that there was a common user of the right of way—Appeal dismissed. (18th July 1967). 8. State (Coughlan) v. Minister for Justice. Applicant detained in Mental Hospital in Dun- drum—Murnaghan J. refused to make absolute conditional order of habeas corpus— Applicant appeared before District Justice Shaw in Septem ber, 1965 on changes under Malicious Damages Act, 1861 while applicant (aged nineteen) was on remand in St. Patrick's Institution. Two doctors certify him to be insane, as he has always been a mental defective—as a result, the Minis ter made an order confining applicant to Grange- gorman—a week later the Minister by order transferred applicant to Dundrum—the charge is adjourned generally—Medical Superintendent of Grangegorman had recommended discharge July, 1965—Mother applies to have applicant re- transferred to Grangegorman. Minister refuses— conditional order obtained in February, 1967. Applicant challenges constitutionality of section 13 of the Lunatic Asylums (Ireland) Act, 1875, which provides that a warrant can be issued order ing a detained person certified by two physicians to be of unsound mind to be detained in an asylum indefinitely until he becomes of sound mind. The Supreme Court held that on a pre liminary investigation the accused had important rights—unlike the omnipotent English Parlia ment, there is a separation of legislative, of judi cial and executive power in our Constitution— the provisions of judicial and executive power in 57