The Gazette 1973

Where the risk of a servant's negligence is covered by insurance, his employer should not seek to make the servant liable for it and the courts should not compel him to allow his name to be used to do it. This was stated by the Master of the Rolls, when the court, Lord Justice Stamp dissenting, allowed an appeal by the fourth party, Mr. Frederick Roberts, of Liverpool, against the decision of Mr. Justice Hollings last April that the third party, Cameron Industrial Services Ltd., of London, were entitled to be subrogated to the right of action of the de- fendants, Ford Motor Co. Ltd., of Regent Street, London (upon payment to the defendants of the agreed amount of damages and costa) against the fourth party to recover complete idemnity in respect of the claim of the plaintiff, Mr. Eric Morris, of Halewood, Liverpool, against the defendants. Morris v. Ford Motor Co. Ltd. and Others; Court of Appeal; 28/3/1973. Before Lord Justice Davies, Lord Justice Megaw and Sir Gordon Willmer. Judgment delivered April 4. Their Lordships allowed, an appeal by the Export Credits Guarantee Department from a decision of Mr. Justice Cooke last June that where an insurance recovery was received in United States dollars after devaluation of sterling in 1967 the Department, as insurers who had paid the amount of the loss in sterling before devaluation, were not entitled to receive any of the excess sum received when the dollars were converted into sterling at the devaluated rate. His Lordship had given judgment against the Department in favour of the plaintiffs, L. Lucas Ltd., of Finsbury Square, London, in a claim against the Department arising out of a policy of insurance (described as a contract of guarantee). Their Lordships gave leave to appeal to the House of Lords. L. Lucas Ltd. and Another v. Export Credits Guarantee Department; Court of Appeal; 6/3/1973. Landlord and Tenant Before Mr. Justice Caulfield. A local authority who were in breach of covenant to repair a house that they had leased and which was included in a clearance area after the authority's medical officer of health had condemned it as unfit for human habitation, were held to have damaged the reversion for which the owners were entitled to damages from the date of a notice of entry under a compulsory purchase order made by the authority. Mr. Justice Caulfield gave reserved judgment for Hibernian Property Co. Ltd. for £1,465 with interest and costs in their claim for damages against Liverpool Corporation for breach of covenant to repair a house at 2 Uhlan Street, Liverpool, which they held over after expiry of a lease of 1875. Hibernian Property Co. Ltd., Liverpool Corporation; The Court of Appeal (the Master of the Rolls, Lord Justice Stamp and Lord Justice James) allowed an appeal by a litigant in person, Mr. Terence Beesley, of Sidcup, Kent, the plaintiff in an action for damages for professional negligence against John L. Williams, solicitors, a firm, of Southampton Row, London, against the decision of Mr. Justice Forbes last November that the trial of the action should be by judge alone and not with a jury. The Master of the Rolls said that the case appeared in the Daily Cause List as "Beesley v. A Solicitor". That was wrong. When there was an action for negligence against a solicitor it appeared at first instance and on appeal as an ordinary listed appeal with the solicitor's name appearing. There had been a mistake in the Appeal Office. The question of trial with a jury had been considered in Ward v. James ([1966] 1 QB 273, 295). In addition there were cases where the views of the individual himself and his desire to be tried with a jury should be put into the scale. The complications of the case could be outweighed by the importance to the parties of issues of credibility, honour and integrity. His Lordship would accede to trial with a jury. Beesley v. Willians; 12/3/1973. Local Government Before Lord Justice Russell, Lord Justice James and Mr. Justice Plowman. A local authority was held to have power under section 15 of the Public Health Act, 1936, in constructing a public surface water sewer, to demolish a bungalow after giving reasonable notice. The court allowed an appeal by Esher Urban District Council from the decision of Mr. Justice Megarry ([1972] Ch 515) whereby the plaintiffs, Mrs. Marjorie Hutton and her father, Mr. John Holtby, the owners of a bungalow in Queen's 146 Queen's Bench Division; 3/4/1973. Litigant in Person wins Jury Trial

moderation in claims for personal injuries and the reasonable expenses appropriate to a normal person should not be in- creased by the exceptional personality of the injured person. The court, in reserved judgments, allowed an appeal by the first defendant, Mrs. Patricia Harrison, of Walton-on-the- Hill, Surrey, against the award of £72,616 damages to the plaintiff, Mr. Ronald Cunningham, of Sutton, Surrey, by Mr. Justice Brabin last December. The damages were reduced to £59,316. A cross-appeal by Mr. Cunningham was dismissed. Leave to appeal was refused. Cunningham v. Harrison and Another; Court of Appeal; 18/5/1973. Extradition Before Lord Wilberforce, Lord Hodson, Lord Diplock, Lord Simon of Glaisdale and Lord Salmon. "Offence . . . of a political character" in section 3(1) of the Extradition Act, 1870, means an offence of a political character vis-á-vis the state requesting extradition. A fugitive is not protected against surrender where the crime committed by him in the territory of the requesting state was directed against the regime not of that state bui of a third state. Their Lordships (Lord Wilberforce and Lord Simon dissenting) dismissed an appeal by Tzu-tsai Cheng, at present detained in Pentonvijle prison, from the rejection by the Divisional Court (the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Justice James and Mr. Justice Eveleigh) on January 24 of his application for habeas corpus. Section 3(1) reads: "A fugitive criminal shall not be surrendered if the offence in respect of which his surrender is demanded is one of a political character, or if he proves to the satisfaction of the police, magistrate or the court before whom he is brought on habeas corpus, or to the Secretary of State, that the requisition for his surrender has in fact been made with a view to try or punish him for an offence of a political character." The appellant was convicted by the Supreme Court of New York in May, 1970, of the attempted murder of one Chiang Ching-kuo. After conviction he failed to surrender to his bail and left for Sweden, which subsequently, acceded to the United States' request for extradition. The appellant fell ill on the journey back and landed at London Airport in Septem- ber, 1972. He was detained by order of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Sir Frank Milton) pursuant to a request by the United States authorities under the 1870 Act for his extra- dition. He now awaited delivery to the United States. Cheng v. Governor of Pentonville Prison; House of Lords; 17/5/1973. Family Before Lord Denning, the Master of the Rolls, Lord Justice Buckley and Lord Justice Stephenson. Judgments delivered April 13. A wife who claimed in divorce proceedings a declaration under section 17 of the Married Women's Property Act, 1882, that she had an equitable interest in a house, bought by her husband long before the marriage, was held to have no right of property in the house under that Act, though she might have a claim under the Matrimonial Proceedings and Property Act, 1970. Their Lordships so held when they allowed an appeal by a former husband, Mr. Cyril Kowalczuk, of Baldock, and remitted to Mr. Registrar Elliot in the Luton District Registry, Family Division, for reconsideration under the 1970 Act his award to the former wife, Mrs. Maria Kowalczuk, of Luton, of a quarter share interest in the house in Baldock, on her application under the 1882 Act. Kowalczuk v. Kowalczuk; Court of Appeal; 26/4/1973. Infants Before Mr. Justice Brightman. Guardians ad litem for infants under the Variation of Trusts Act, 1958, should not be mere ciphers, his Lordship said when approving an arrangement under the Act. He ruled that the absence of any real consent on the part of the guardians in the present case did not in the circumstances deprive the court of jurisdiction to approve the arrangement. The application was by Mrs. Olive Whittall, of Yarmouth, Isle of Wight, for approval of an arrangement under the Act, varying trusts declared by her late husband, Arthur Whittall, in a settlement dated November 28, 1953. Whittall v. Faulkner and Others; Chancery Division; 10/5/1973. Insurance Before Lord Denning, the Master of the Rolls, Lord Justice Stamp and Lord Justice James.