The Gazette 1971

The latest agreement between the Minister of Transport and the Motor Insurers' Bureau for the compensation of victims of untraced drivers gives the Bureau such wide powers to require the victim to bring proceedings against an identified person involved in the same accident as to make the Bureau the person standing behind the victim's action. Therefore the Court's power under the Rules of the Supreme Court to order joinder of any party necessary to determine any cause or matter should not be used to allow the Bureau, on their own application, to be joined as defendants to any such action. [White v London Transport Executive and Another; The Times, 4th May 1971.] A widow claiming damages under the Fatal Accidents Acts for the death of her husband should not be compelled to be subjected to a medical examination at the request of the defence to help to ascertain her expectation of life. [Baugh v Delta Water Fittings Ltd. and Another; The Times, 13th May 1971.] Property The President held that Section 4 of the Matrimonial Pro- ceedings and Property Act, 1970, is retrospective. He granted an application by Mrs. V. Williams under Section 4 (a) for the transfer to her of the house where she lives with her children in Geoffrey Road, S.E., which was vested in her for- mer husband, Mr. J. S. Williams, from whom she obtained a divorce. Section 4 provides: "On granting a decree of divorce . . . or at any time thereafter (whether, in the case of a decree of divorce . . . before or after the decree is made absolute), the Court may . .. make . . . (a) an order that a party to the marriage shall transfer to the other party .. . such property as may be specified, being the property to which the first-menti- oned party is entitled, either in possession ór reversion .. ." [Williams v Williams; The Times, 8th April 197l.j Tax The expenses a subcontracting bricklayer incurred in travelling daily to the various sites where he was working were held to be deductible in arriving at his taxable profits under Schedule D on the ground that the base of his business was his home. [Horton v Young (Inspector of Taxes); The Times, 7th May 1971.] Expense incurred by newspaper publishers in providing meals and drinks for contributors, informants, and other contacts was held not to be allowable as a deduction in computing their profits for tax purposes, on the ground that it was the trade of the taxpayers, Associated Newspapers Ltd., to provide news- papers, not entertainment. They were, therefore, within the provisions of Section 15 of the Finance Act, 1965, which disallow the deduction of business entertainment expenses in computing profits for tax purposes, and were not saved by Section 15 (9). Subsection (9) provides: "Nothing in this section shall be taken as precluding the deduction of expenses incurred in .. the provision by any person of anything which it is his trade to provide, and which is provided by him in the ordinary course of that trade for payment or, with the object of advertising to the public generally, gratuitously." [Fleming (Inspector of Taxes) v Associated Newspapers Ltd.; The Times, 13th May 1971.] Income arising to an Irish company the shares of which were settled on Major Antony Philippi, of Barrymore Lodge, Co. Cork, by his father when he was nine, was held to be caught by Section 412 of the Income Tax Act, 1952, and deemed to be his income. The preamble to Section 412 provides: "For the purpose of preventing the avoiding by individuals ordinarily resident in the United Kingdom of liability to income tax by means of transfers of assets by virtue of or in consequence whereof, either alone or in conjunction with associated operations, income becomes payable to persons resident or domiciled out of the United Kingdom, it is hereby enacted as follows .. ." Subsection (3) provides that the "section shall not apply if the individual shows in writing or otherwise . .. that the purpose of avoiding liability to taxation was not the purpose or one of the purposes for which the transfer or associated operations or any of them were effected . . . " [Philippi v Inland Revenue Commissioners; The Times, 18th May 1971.] Shipping Their Lordships held, dismissing an appeal by Timber Ship- ping Co. S.A. (the charterers) from a decision of the Court 87

Landlord and Tenant An option to renew a lease "at a rent to be fixed having regard to the market value of the premises at the time of exercising this option taking into account to the advantage of the tenant any increased value of such premises attributable to structural improvements made by the tenant" during the lease was held to be valid and enforceable and provided a formula for fixing the rent. [Brown v Gould and Others; The Times, 30th April 1971.] Licensing The Vice-Chancellor refused to grant to Newark Livestock Auctions, a consortium of ten individual auctioneers, injunc- tions seeking to prevent Newark Corporation and another group of eleven auctioneers, known as the Gascoine consor- tium, from excluding from Newark cattle market livestock sent to them for sale by auction. His Lordship held that the corporation, in the exercise of its powers of management, had lawfully granted to the Gascoine consortium an exclusive licence to use the market facilities. [Eden and Others v Newark Corporation and Others; The Times, 20th May 1971.] Licensing Appeal Although a Magistrates' Court hearing an appeal from a licen- sing authority's refusal to grant a heavy goods vehicle driver's licence has power to "make such order as it thinks fit and an order so made shall be binding on the licensing authority" under Section 195 (2) of the Road Traffic Act, 1960, the Magistrates' Court cannot order the licensing authority to do something which the authority otherwise has no power to do. The Divisional Court so held when granting an application by Mr. Herbert Ernest Robson, chairman of the Eastern traffic area commissioners, for an order of certiorari quashing an order by Ipswich justices that Mr. R. F. K. Callaway be granted a heavy goods vehicle driver's licence. He was stated to have been driving heavy goods vehicles for over ten years. [Regina v Ipswich Justices, ex parte Robson; The Times, 15th May 1971.] Matrimonial Love letters assumed to have been written by the named co- respondent to a wife before the trial of her husband's petition for divorce on the ground of her adultery were held to be "very solid grounds" for ordering a new trial in which the letters will be admitted as further evidence, even though they might have been but were not made available at the trial. [Skore v Skore and Another; The Times, 14th May 1971.] Negligence See under Damages; Eley v Bedford; The Times, 5th May 1971. See under Procedure; White v London Transport Executive and Another; The Times, 4th May 1971. Practice and Procedure The Court settled a difference in the authorities as to the test whether a Judge's order was interlocutory or final, and held that it depended on the nature of the application and not on the nature of the order as made. Their Lordships decided that an appeal from a County Court Judge's refusal to order a new trial, as also the grant of a new trial, was interlocutory and not final so that notice of appeal should be set down within four- teen days of the order made. They dismissed an application by Dr. S. R. Ghosh, of Howitt Road, N.W., for leave to appeal against the refusal of Judge Leslie in Bloomsbury and Marylebone County Court to grant him a new trial of an action by Salter Rex & Co., auctioneers and valuers, in which they had been given judgment for professional fees of £47 for valuing his house. [Salter Rex & Co. v Ghosh; The Times, 21st April 1971.] Procedure Where large sums of money are deposited by trustees with banks for fixed terms the fact that another bank may have a claim of some kind or another against the trustees does not mean that it has any title to the funds deposited in inter- pleader proceedings. Interpleader only deals with the title to the fund. [Bank of the Commonwealth v Banco de Bilbao and Another; The Times, 1st May 1971.] Judge's Interrogations The Court ordered a new trial-of a case where the Judge acted as the main interrogator of the witnesses and asked 334 ques- tions—more than both counsel had asked. TAli v London Spinning Co. Ltd.; The Times, 20th April