The Gazette 1972

premises for £101,000. The Judge held that, as there had been prior agreement to sell to U.D.T., that agree- ment must stand. Originally the U.D.T. offer was the only one on the market, and it was only later that the other offer appeared. Furthermore it had been com- municated with the approval of the Judge. The Court accordingly had agreed to a bargain. It was unfortunate that the higher offer was not made in time. The Judge was quite right to regard himself as being bound to permit the liquidator to complete the contract signed by the purchaser. The appeal was accordingly dismissed. [In re Hibernian Transport Companies and in re Companies Act 1963; full Supreme Court; unreported; 20th December 1971; judgment of Walsh J.] Guardianship of Infants: Custody of girl infants awarded on appeal to father. The facts of this case have been fully set out in the September/October Gazette 1971 at page 131. Kenny J. had awarded the custody of the three infant daughters to the guilty mother, on the ground that they would be happier at home than in a boarding school in Dublin. The full Supreme Court reversed this decision. Per Walsh J. : By staying in a boarding school, the children are leading a stable existence. The school con- cerned specialises in catering for children from broken homes. If possible, the father wishes to set up the family life again with the assistance of a housekeeper. The children are being brought up in proximity to their father an to their grandparents. The mother should have access, but the children cannot be taken out of the jurisdiction. [W. v W.; Supreme Court; unreported; 10th Dec. 1971.] Ruling against Union on Bar Waitresses: Breach of constitutional rights to compel employers to dis- miss them under threat of pickets. In a reserved judgment in the High Court, Mr. Justice Kenny held that the threat of a picket to compel employers to dismiss bar waitresses solely because they were women was a breach of their constitutional rights. He was giving his decision on the question whether the owners of three Dublin licensed premises had estab- lished that they had a reasonable prospect of success in their suit against the Irish National Union of Vintners, Grocers and Allied Trades Assistants and its general secretary, Michael Gleary. The Court continued an injunction granted to P. T. Prendergast Ltd., owners of The Parkway Bar, Walkins- town Cross; Mr. Francis Walsh, owner of The Chariot Inn, Ranelagh, and the owners of O'Byrnes, Rathgar Road, against Mr. Gleary, restraining him from autho- rising persons to picket the premises. The order is effective until the trial of the action or until further order. Mr. Justice Kenny said that two plaintiffs were mem- bers of the Licensed Grocers and Vintners Association which had entered into agreements with the first-named defendant, the union, in 1924. Another agreement was made in 1968 in relation to a new category of workers known as bar waiters. There was nothing in the agree- 91

Certiorari made absolute where Justice acts outside jurisdiction Martin Dolphin, was arrested on 29 September 1970, and charged with assaulting a Garda, and two civilians. On 1st October, he was admitted to bail. He was also charged with using abusive language on 7th October On that day he behaved in an insulting manner, and was sentenced to seven days for contempt of Court. On 22nd October medical evidence was adduced in the District Court to the effect that he was unfit to plead. On, 3rd December, the Justice heard the evidence of four psychiatrists confirming this, and he was remanded until 4th February 1972. On 4th December 1970, the Minister for Justice made an Order under the Lunatic Asylums Act, 1875, that the accused be removed to the Central Mental Hospital in Dundrum. On 29th Jaiv uary 1971, a friend of the accused, who was concerned about his condition, applied to Kenny, J. for a con- ditional order of habeas corpus and of certiorari for the purpose of quashing the orders made by the Justice on 3rd December 1970. The Governor of the Central Mental Hospital then stated that Dolphin was then fit to plead, and he was released from there on 2nd February 1972. The Justice made an affidavit to the effect that Dolphin was not in a fit state to comprehend the proceedings on 3rd December. The friend of the applicant now applied to make the conditional order of Certiorari which had been duly granted by Kenny, J., absolute. The main ground was that the District Justice should not have considered whether Dolphin was fit to plead or not in his absence. Dolphin himself, as a leading Maoist, has throughout refused to recognise (1) That Dolphin's friend was competent to re- present him at these hearings, as much for habeas corpus —as for certiorari. (2) The only jurisdiction the Justice had on 3rd December 1970, under section 24 of the Criminal Pro- cedure Act 1967, was to remand the accused for a further period. There was no jurisdiction to decide the issue whether the accused was unfit to plead, parti- cularly when the accused was not present. The order °f the Justice was made without jurisdiction. Accordingly the conditional order of Certiorari should be made absolute. [In re Dolphin—The State (Egan) v the Governor °f the Central Mental Hospital and District Justice O'Huadhaigh; unreported; Kenny, J.; 27th January 1972.] Contract: A late higher offer for premises is not accep- table if the Court has approved the terms of the contract for sale, and if this contract has been signed by the first purchaser. Appeal against Kenny J.'s decision of 11th October 1971 l hat the United Dominions Trust (Ireland) Ltd. were the purchasers of Hibernian House, Fleet Street, Dub- lin. for £65,000. The reserve price had previously been fixed by the Court at £70,000 but there was no bid at the auction. Subsequently a bid was made by U.D.T. to purchase for £65,000. After The contract for pur- chase had been signed by U.D.T., but not by the official liquidator of Hibernian Transport, the solicitor for the Irish Permanent Building Society handed the Judge a document, which was an offer by them to purchase the the jurisdiction of the Courts. Accordingly Kenny, J. held :