The Gazette 1913-14

The Gazette otthe Incorporated Law Society of Ireland.

[FEBRUARY, 1914

(II.) " In all suits and proceedings under any of the provisions of the County Officers and Courts (Ireland) Act, 1877, Part II., other than those provided for above in the ' lower ' scale, there shall be paid the costs set forth in the column headed ' higher scale.' (V.) " The value of the subject-matter of any suit for the taxation of stamp duties, and the allowances of fees, costs, charges and expenses shall, in case of dispute, be assessed by the Judge. X. "As to all fees and allowances which are discretionary the officer on taxation shall take into consideration the amount or value of the subject of litigation." Although part of the claim was for an order that the defendant should pay, and although a period was usually given for pay ment before the sale of the lands was decreed, the suit was not of the nature of a personal action. The gist of the suit was that the debt might be put on the lands by way of charge, and the charge realised out of the lands. When the lands were sold the court was bound to distribute the purchase money according to law, and to ascertain the priorities of the incumbrances inter se and distribute the purchase money in accordance with the rights of the various persons holding interest in the lands. The subject of litiga tion or the subject-matter of the suit must be something having a money value or capable of having a money value ; it might be the mortgage debt—the claim—or it might be the lands or property—viz., the sale whereout the claim was to be satisfied ; it could not be both in the aggregate, nor need it necessarily be something the value of which was known at the commencement of the proceedings, because, as had been seen, in the case of a bank giving an equitable mortgage the amount of the mortgage debt had to be a subject of inquiry. The subject-matter appeared to be some one thing the value of which was to be the test as to the scale of costs. If the amount of the claim was the subject-matter in all representative suits there would be more than one subject-matter. He thought that the subject-matter meant the material which was to be operated upon by the decree of the Judge for the purpose of satisfying the plaintiff's claim in the suit, and that in this case could only mean the lands. In an administration suit it would be

absurd to say that the creditor's demand was the subject-matter of the suit, or the subject of litigation. That the assets constituted the subject-matter of the suit seemed plain. The proof of.the plaintiff's claim was not usually a matter of much trouble, but the realization of the property out of which that i claim and the claims of other chargeants had i to be satisfied was, in the ordinary course, a | troublesome and expensive proceeding. ; If the value of the subject-matter was not I known at the commencement of the suit it i could be assessed by the Judge at any time I under rule V. He reversed the order appealed from and remitted the case to the Registrar with a direction to tax the costs on the " higher scale." (Reported Irish Law Times Reports, Vol. XLVIIL, p. 25.) KING'S BENCH DIVISION (ENGLAND). (Before RIDLEY and BANKES, JJ.) HARPER v. EYJOLFSSON. Jan. 15, 1914.— Solicitors—Unqualified Clerk —Remuneration—Business introduced — Proportion of profits—Determination of engagement—Continuance of agreement—• Solicitors Act, 1843 (6 6- 7 Vict., c. 73), - s. 32. Though an agreement which provides that a solicitor's clerk, who is not a qualified solicitor, is to receive by way of remuneration a proportion of the profits on business introduced by him to the solicitor is in itself legitimate, yet where such an agreement also provides that such payment is to continue after the determination of the Clerk's engage ment, the inference is that the business is the business of the clerk and not of the solicitor, and the agreement is therefore illegal undei s. 32 of the Solicitors Acts, 1843. This was an appeal by the defendant in an action tried in the Mayor's Court, London, before the Common Serjeant and a jury. The action was brought by Mr. Harper, a managing clerk in the employment of Messrs. Nimmo and Co., solicitors, of 10 and 12 Copthall Avenue, against the defendant, the managing director of a Cqmpany known as the Finance Corporation (Limited), to recover damages for malicious prosecution in the following circumstances. The plaintiff and