The Gazette 1992

GAZETTE

JUNE

1992

Thble 1 Source: Finance February, 1992

Drunk Driving: Failure to Give a Specimen: Shock can be a Reasonable Excuse The Queen's Bench (Divisional Court) had held in DPP -v- Pearman, The Times, Law Report, March 27, 1992 that justices were entitled, without having heard any medical evidence, to find that shock combined with inebriation which rendered a defendant physically incapable of providing a breath specimen for analysis, could amount to a reasonable excuse for failing to provide a specimen under section 7(6) of the (UK) Road Traffic, Act, 1988. The Queen's Bench Divisional Court so held in dismissing an appeal by the prosecution against a decision of mid-Hertfordshire Justices to acquit Susan Elizabeth Pearman of failing to provide a breath specimen without reasonable excuse. Lloyd LJ said that the justices had found that the defendant had provided one specimen of breath but when it came to providing a second specimen she began to lose her composure. She blew into the intoximeter but was unable to provide a sufficient breath for a second specimen. The defendant sobbed continuously and felt short of breath and unable to breathe properly. Her condition prevented the supply of further breath specimens. Lloyd LJ said it was clear the justices had the test in R -v- Lennard [1973] 1 WLR 483 well in mind. It was open to the justices to conclude that the defendant was physically incapable of providing a second specimen, although the fact that she had succeeded in providing the first specimen meant the case was very close to the borderline. The second submission for the prosecutor was that the justices should not have reached that conclusion without medical evidence. The Court was unwilling to accept the proposition in those absolute terms.

Ireland - The Top Corporate Law Firms (Ranked in order of staff numbers)

NAME

Total No.

Partners

Other fee Earners

Other staff

1. McCann FitzGerald 2. A&L Goodbody

224 223 140 118 112

43 28 21 15 16 10

79 93 39 44 47 20 32 28 27 18 21 19 24 10

102 102

3. Arthur Cox

80 59 49 45 24 26 30 30 25 22 20 22 17 14 nd 14 17 14 12 29

4. Matheson Ormsby Prentice

5. Willam Fry

6. Mason Hayes & Curran 7. Eugene F Collins 8. Gerrard Scallan & O'Brien 9. Ivor Fitzpatrick & Co. 11. Cawley Sheerin Wynne 12. Murray Sweeney (Limerick) 13. Rory O'Donnell & Co. 14. Whitney Moore & Keller 15. Holmes O'Malley & Sexton (Limerick) 16. Kenny Stephenson & Chapman (Waterford) 10. Beauchamps

75 64 63 62 56 55 49 48 42 33 33 30 27 26 25 25 24 22 20 20 41

8 9 5 8 9 8 4

10

7

5

5 3 7 3 5 3 6 3 6 4 5 9

11 16 nd 10

16. Binchys

17. JG O'Connor & Co. 18. Patrick F O'Reilly 19. Gore & Crimes

4

20. M.J. Horgan & Sons (Cork)

8 7 9 6 3 4

20. Orpen Franks

21. LK Shields & Partners

12 16 13 11

22. Dockrell Farrell 23. McKeever & Son

23. JW O'Donovan & Co. (Cork) 24. Reddy Charlton McKnight

19 18

7

3 4

25. Kevans

3

11

Thble 2 Source: Legal Business, March 1992

UK - The Top Ten Law Firms Ranked by Profits per Partner 1991 Firm Gross Fees Fees per Average Profits £ million fee-earner profits per £000 per equity fee-earner partner £000 £000

£

£

£

£

207 208 207 208 185 181 199 190 167 155

232 144 115 113 111

278 349 293 377 321 344 312 281 265

Clifford Chance Linklaters & Paines Slaughter and May Lovell White Durrant Freshfields

56 69 60 65 54 54 56 57 47 43

94 89 84 72 63

Allen & Overy Herbert Smith

Simmons & Simmons

Norton Rose

178

Nabarro Nathanson

The table gives a figure for the average net profit generated per equity partner within a firm. Average profits per equity partner are not the same as take home pay.

133