The Gazette 1990

GAZETTE

SEPTEMBER 1990

chapter may perhaps include reference also to the Commission rulings in the Irish Distillers Group pic takeover. It is hoped that future releases may also refer to some recent developments in the UK including the latest chapter in the sagas of House of Fraser and British Aerospace/Rover as well as the application of the judicial review mechanism (equivalent to that under Order 84 in Ireland) to the Take-Over Panel building on such cases as Fx p. Datafin [1987] 1 All ER 564, CA, and Ex p. Guinness [1989] 1 All ER 509, CA, both of which are considered in the text. The Fifth Edition of Weinberg & Blank does not come cheap but it is indispensable for those dealing with the subject in the UK or (as in virtually all cases) having even a connection with the UK. For the reasons enumerated above it will prove of considerable value to Irish lawyers advising even on purely domestic cases and its relevance and usefulness to Irish lawyerswill increase all the more as the tide of Companies legislation inspired by Brussels gathers pace and a fortiori if there should be a major legislative reform of financial services in Ireland as has been advocated by some. Patrick J.C. McGovern There are now few areas of legal jurisprudence in this jurisdiction where the academic or practitioner cannot turn to an Irish textbook for guidance. With the publication of Dr. White's 2 volume work, the "Irish Law of Damages", this category is further reduced. Indeed there has been a virtual deluge of legal "homegrown" texts produced in the last few years and it is important that this area, which for so many practitioners is a large part of their practice, is now covered. Dr. White's approach to the subject is to divide it into 2 volumes. Broadly Volume 1 is an examination of the philosophical tenets which underlie our law of damages and an analysis of its range and breadth in the light of this examination. His approach might be deemed "academic", in I R I SH LAW OF DAMAGES By J o hn P. White. 2 vols, IRC80 . 00. Butterworths.

the perjorative sense, by some practitioners. However, in order to grasp the essence of, and to understand fully, such concepts as remoteness, foreseeability, and miti- gation it is imperative to start from first principles. Too often, it seems, practitioners leave their jurispru- dential equipment behind them when they qualify, feeling it is of little real relevance or assistance in their day to day practice. This view is rightly challenged head on by Dr. White's work. He is not afraid to point out areas where a more coherent approach should be adopted which would necessitate, in some cases, statutory intervention to deal with glaring injustices and imbalances in the system. One such area where he argues for a new approach is that of recovery for wrongful death. Having pointed out the injustices and shortcomings of the current legal position he presents a coher- ent, well thought out and con- structive set of solutions. As he points out, these may not all be taken on board by judges but should start a debate on the subject and indeed set the agenda for such a debate. Volume 2 is a classified guide to the levels of quantum of damages for non pecuniary loss arising from personal injury starting with what are termed "catastrophic injuries" such as paraplegia and moving on to cover injury to various regions and parts of the human anatomy in considerable detail. In so doing, Dr. White has unearthed an amount of previously unpublished Supreme Court case law dealing, in parti- cular, with quantum and the level of damages then considered appropriate for different types of injuries. Such decisions were largely unavailable when juries were still involved in personal injury cases in the High Court owing to the fact that the views of the Supreme Court could not be disclosed to these juries. Dr. White was allowed access to the Supreme Court records by the Chief Justice and has used these together with the few written judgments that exist. The result is to offer real guid- ance in the task of trying to establish some parameters for similar types of injury and the level of damages which should be awarded. He is careful to point out

the pre-eminent principles of having special regard to the peculiar facts of each case and that the facts are not fact until so found by the trial judge. There will be a need for a con- stant update of this extremely valuable guide and it is to be hoped that Dr. White will devote at least some of his considerable energies to this task. What his research does illustrate is the urgency of a com- prehensive and up to date system of reporting of our jurisprudence in this area as in others. Without this the system remains open to accusations of disparity, imbalance and lack of precision when setting levels of awards of damages. Dr. White's work is to be highly recommended and should be com- pulsory reading for all lawyers working in the area. Geraldine M. Clarke Edited by J . F . McEldowney and Paul O'Higgins, [Irish Academic Press. 1990. 248pp. £27.50. Hardback]. Professor Francis Headon Newark, a former holder of the Chair of Civil Law in the Queen's University of Belfast, hoped in 1947 that one day Ireland might have its Reeves or Holdsworth: (1947) 7 N.I.L.Q. 121. However, Professor Newark cor- rectly noted that it would not be an easy task to write the legal history of Ireland. Professor Newark referred sadly to June 30, 1922, when the Four Courts was destroyed with the result that "the charred remains of the legal records were literally scattered over the City of Dublin." The editors of The Common Law Tradition in their joint essay "The Common Law tradition and Irish legal history" in paying tribute to Professor Paul O'Higgins note that the O'Higgins Bibliographies help to destroy the myth that all was lost in the fire in the Four Courts in Dublin. The select bibliography in The Common Law Tradition further proves that many fruitful sources do exist for Irish legal historical research. The editors refer to the lack of legal historical scholarship and decry the lack of financial and THE COMMON LAW TRAD I T I ON

262