The Gazette 1972

Insurance Mistakes made by an insurance company's agent in carrying out his instructions to ask the questions on the proposal form and himself write down the answers were held by the Court, on the special facts of the case, to make the company liable to pay out on a claim by the insured whose wife had signed the form so filled in. After giving its decision the Court was asked by counsel for the insurance company for leave to appeal to the House of Lords. It was, he said, more or less the standard practice of many insurance companies to instruct their agents to write down the answers in proposal forms for "countless thousands" of small industrial and other policies; and the court's present decision would have the gravest bearing on the whole conduct of such policies. The court refused leave. [Stone v Reliance Mutual Insurance Society Ltd.; C.A.; 14/3/1972.] Landlord and Tenant The Court of Appeal, on an appeal by Accountancy Personnel Ltd., an employment agency, tenants of the first and second floors of 51 Cannon Street, EC, extended by three months the date on which Judge Rogers, in the Mayor's and City of London Court last July, decided that they should vacate the premises on the ground that their landlords, the Worshipful Company of Salters and their partners, Electricity Supply Nominees Ltd., owners of the freehold of those premises and large areas of the surrounding land, had established under Section 30 (1) (f) of the Landlord and Tenant Act, 1954, that they intended on the termination of the current tenancy to demolish the premises. [Accountancy Personnel Ltd. v Worshipful Company of Salters; C.A; 7/3/1972.] Licensing A licensee was held to have "knowingly" sold drinks to an under-age person in the lounge of the public house even though the sale was made by a barman to whom complete control of the lounge had been delegated and the licensee, who was serving in the public bar, had no actual knowledge of what happened. [Howker v Robinson; QBD; Div. Ct.; 21/3/1972.] Natural Justice See under Tax; Pearlberg v Varty (Inspector of Taxes); House of Lords; 24/3/1972. Negligence A driver who admitted taking no precautions when he realised that a woman pedestrian who was about to cross the road in front of his car had not seen him was held one-third respon- sible for her injuries when she was knocked down. [Williams v Needham; QBD; Judge Stebb; 7/3/1972.] A widow failed to recover damages for the death of her hus- band who was trapped and fatally injured when his articu- lated lorry was sandwiched between two other large lorries in a concertina accident on the Ml in January 1968. The injuries which led to his death were held to have been entirely caused by the impact with the lorry in front and not by the subsequent impact of the lorry from behind. TSmith v Samuel Williams and Son Ltd. and Another; QBD; Bristow J.; 2/3/1972] Planning •Notice of appeal against an enforcement notice must be given to the Minister within the time specified in Section 16 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1968, and, since it was a matter that went to the jurisdiction, there was no power to extend the time. Howard v Secretary of State for the Environment; QBD; Bristow J.; 29/3/1972.] Procedure The proper place to apply for an interim injunction is the High Court in London and not the county court, where a claim for an injunction is only permissible when it is ancillary to a claim for damages. [Arnbridge (Reading) Ltd. (trading as Manpower (Read- ing) Ltd.) v Hedges and Others; C.A.; 16/3/1972.] Rating A house owned by Bexley Congregational Church which was vacant for 11 months but held available by the church as an

official residence for the minister was held not to be liable for rates during the period it was empty. [Bexley Congregational Church Treasurer v Bexley London Borough; C.A.; 23/3//1972.] Redundancy» An employee who is unable to work at the time of his dis- missal because of illness may still be entitled to a redundancy payment. Therefore, a shipyard fitter who, because of illness, had been off work for 18 months, during which time he received no wages but might recover, was held to be entitled to a redundancy payment when the shipyard was closed. [Marshall v Harland and Wolff Ltd.; National Industrial Relations Court; 13/3/1972.] Solicitors Mr. R. H. Douglas, of Bournemouth, lost an appeal against the finding of the Disciplinary Committee of the Law Society, constituted under the Solicitors' Acts, 1957-1965, on 13 Jan. 1972, that he was guilty of professional misconduct and/or conduct unbefitting a solicitor in that he had breached Rules 1 and 2 of the Solicitors' Practice Rules, 1936, when he said that he had taken employment with the National House Owners Society as an agent in relation to their members' conveyancing work, and as a solicitor for the internal purposes of the society. The committee had fined him £750. Rule 1 provides: "A solicitor shall not directly or indirectly apply for or seek instructions for professional business . • Rule 2 provides: "A solicitor shall not hold himself out or allow himself to be held out directly or indirectly . . . as being prepared to do professional business . . . in non-contentious matters at less than the scale fixed . . . " [In re a Solicitor; QBD; Div. Ct.; 13/3/1972.] A solicitor may justifiably be found guilty of professional mis- conduct if he keeps his books of account in such a way that it is not possible to ascertain readily at any one time the balance held on account of each individual client even though he has been completely honest throughout. Their Lordships so held on an appeal by a solicitor from the dismissal by the Queen's Bench Divisional Court on 14 February of his appeal from the findings and order of the Disciplinary Committee of the Law Society that he should be suspended from practice for six months for failure to comply with the Solicitors' Accounts Rules and for professional mis- conduct as stated above. But the court lifted the suspension order on being satisfied that the solicitor's books were now in order and up to date. He was ordered to pay all the Law Succession The will of an 82-year-old woman by which she left her whole estate of £3,144 to a cancer research charity was held to a disposition under the Family Provision Act, 1966, which did not make reasonable provision for an incapacitated son living on State assistance. The court ordered that the son should have 11/12ths and the charity l/12th of the balance of the etate. They also ordered the charity to pay the costs of the appeal. Tax Natural justice does not require that a taxpayer who has not made returns of income for many yean shall be present and be heard when his inspector of taxes applies for leave under Section 6 of the Income Tax Management Act. 1964, to raise late assessments. The commissioner when deciding whether or not to grant leave is performing an administrative and not * judicial function, and the taxpayer will have an opportnity of being heard if and when he appeals against any assessments " made. TPearlberg v Varty (Inspector of Taxes); House of Lords; 24/3/1972.] A bonus of £1,000 and money prizes given to Bobby Moor c - captain of the victorious English team in the World Cup 1966 were held to he payments having the quality of test»- monials, marking his participation in an exceptional even]» and not Payments made in reward or remuneration for nt» services. Accordingly they were not. assessable to income ta* under Schedule F. of the Income Tax Act, 1952. [Moore v Griffiths; Ch. Div.; Brightman J.; 24/3/1972.] 136 Society's costs of all the proceedings. [In re a Solicitor; C.A.; 29/3/1972.] [Millward v Shenton and Another; C.A.; 24/3/1972.]