The Gazette 1974

views of the English Law Society opposing assessors of claims and contingency fees are fully given, and Master Jacob is fully quoted on "The present importance of pleadings" as expressed in Current Legal Problems, 1960, and Master Diamond on "The Summons for Directions" as expounded in the Law Quarterly Review, 1959. JUSTICE in its Report on the Trial of Motor Accident Cases, 1966, emphasises that counsel's brief fee becomes payable upon delivery of briefs, and is still payable subsequently, even though the case is settled. As regards pre-trial criminal proceedings, Lord Parker stressed in Rice v Connolly (1966 ) 3 W.L.R., that there was all the difference in the world between telling a false story—something which a citizen has no right to do—and preserving silence or refusing to answer— something they have every right to do. The Judge's Rules of 1964 are then cited in full. Lord Devlin, in "Too High a Price for Conviction" in the Sunday Times of 2 July 1972 has rightly emphasised that the proposals of the English Criminal Law Revision Committee of 1972 are primarily designed to help the police to secure convictions; this is followed by Professor Cross's out- standing article on "The Right to Silence and the Presumption of Innocence" extracted from the 1970 volume of the Journal of the Society of Public Teachers of Law. John Lambert in "The Police Can Choose" has indicated that the policeman has at no time been simply a law enforcement officer, but has discretion to prosecute. But JUSTICE in its Report on "The Prosecution Process in England and Wales" (1970), states that "the honest, zealous and conscientious police officer, who has satisfied himself that the suspect is guilty becomes psychologically com- mitted to successful prosecution. The dominance of the police on the English prosecution process undoubtedly exposes them to grievous temptations." Clive Davies emphasises that at any given time a tenth of the prison population is composed of untried or unsentenced pris- oners. The English Law Society in its Annual Report 1965-66, on Pre-Trial Discovery, has emphasised the difficulties which are put in the way of defence counsel by the police. To lawyers, English Co. Courts are the acme of infor- mality, while to the layman, they are surrounded by a bewildering maze of rules and practices; this the Con- sumer Council in a lengthy report has termed "Justice out of Reach". Judge Jerome Frank considers that trial court fact-finding is the toughest part of the judicial function, not the elaboration of legal principles. On the Continent, emphasis is rightly placed on written evidence; there is no sanctity in oral evidence as in England. However, as Gerald Coplan points out in "The Judicial Discretion to disallow admissible Evidence", there are many cases when Judges are cussed and have with malice aforethought refused to exercise their dis- cretion to exclude evidence, although it was obtained in circumstances unfair to the accused. For instance in R. v Maqsud Ali (1966) 1 Q.B., an English Court had the temerity to allow evidence of a conversation between two men which had been recorded without their knowledge, where neither of the men were charged. It has been strangely stated that, unless there is a statutory obligation to do so, there is no duty ot state reasons for judicial or administrative decisions; prima facie there appears to be an implied duty, particularly in respect of the Superior Courts.

unknown in the law. In Director of Public Prosecutions v Doot (1973) A.C., the accused, who were American citizens, planned to import cannabis into the USA by way of England. One of the vans containing the drug was found in Southampton and another in Liverpool. The defence to the charge of conspiracy to import drugs was that the conspiracy had been effected abroad; this succeeded in the Court of Appeal but failed in the House of Lords. In Palmer v the Queen (1971) A.C., the defence of self-defence in a murder affray which succeeded recently in the Dwyer case in Ireland, did not commend itself to the Privy Council. In R. v Hyam (1974) 2 W.L.R., Diana Hyam was an alleged lover of Jones, who heard that Jones intended to go on holidays with another woman. Hyam was furious, went to Jones's house, poured petrol through the letter box and pushed the newspaper in; she then lit the paper and caused a fierce fire. She left without raising the alarm. Two girls who were in the house with their mother were killed; Hyam's defence was that she merely intended to frighten the woman. She had also ascer- tained that at the time Jones was in his own home and could not come to any harm. Hyam was convicted of murder which the House of Lords sustained by a 3-2 majority; however, the dissenting view of Lord Diplock that the decision in D.P.P. v Smith (1961) A.C., upon which the majority relied, was wrong insofar as it rejected the submission that, in order to amount to the crime of murder, the offender, if he did not intend to kill, must have intended or foreseen as a likely conse- quence of his act that human life would be endangered, must command respect. In R. v Lamb (1967), 2 Q.B., the accused pointed in fun a revolver at a friend, but fired a bullet accidentally, killing the friend. The accused, having been convicted of manslaughter ap- pealed and the accused was duly acquitted, on the ground that his case had not been properly put to the jury. In R. v Duffy (1967) I Q.B., Lillian Duffy went to the aid of her twin sister, Kathleen, who had been fighting with a Pakistani. Both girls were convicted of unlawful wounding, but on appeal, Lillian was acquit- ted, as her case had not been properly put to the jury. This summary will show that the learned authors have dealt most effectively:: with the most up-to-date cases. Zander (Michael)—Cases and Materials on the English Legal System. 8vo; xxvi plus 484 pp.; index (double column), pp. 477-484; London : Weidenfeld and Nicol- son, 1973; Series : "Law in Context"; paperback, £2.95. Mr. Zander will be well-known to members as the Legal Correspondent of The Guardian and as author of Lawyers and the Public Interest, but the fact that he is also a Reader in Law in the London School of Econ- omics is perhaps not so evident. This book contains a most useful mine of information on the English legal system. In discussing the role of the Courts and Tribu- nals, the reorganisation of the Courts carried on as a result of the Beeching Report is fully considered; Lord Gardiner's speech in introducing the Family Division into the High Court in 1970 is given in full, as is an excerpt from Abel-Smith and Stevens on the proper role of the Courts and Tribunals from "In Search of Justice". With regard to pre-trial civil proceedings, Sir Thomas Lund is quoted as stating that it is permissible for the solicitor for either party in civil or criminal proceedings to interview or take a statement from any witness; the

256