The Gazette 1940-44

The Gazette of the Incorporated Law Society of Ireland

[May, 1943

LEGAL APPOINTMENTS. MR. GEORGE H. POLLOCK, Secretary of the Incorporated Law Society of Northern Ire land, has been appointed Clerk of the Crown and Peace, for Belfast and County Antrim, in succession to Mr. R. A. Corscadden, now Chief Crown Solicitor for Northern Ireland. Mr. Pollock was admitted a Solicitor in Easter Sittings, 1917, and practised in Bel fast up to the year 1924, when he was ap pointed Secretary of the Incorporated Law Society of Northern Ireland. ' MR. RALPH S. NEILSON, Solicitor, has been appointed temporarily to succeed Mr. Pollock as Secretary of the Incorporated Law Society of Northern Ireland. Mr. JAMES A. GEARY has been appointed Solicitor to the Department of Posts and Telegraphs. Mr. Geary was admitted in Michaelmas Sittings, 1930. He practised at 6 Clare Street, Dublin, and was subsequently appointed Assistant Solicitor in the office of the Chief State Solicitor. He is a member of the Society. JUNE EXAMINATIONS, 1943. An Intermediate Examination will be held on 1st June. First and Second Examinations in Irish will be held on 4th and 5th June.

will realise the stock for the best price obtainable and let us have cheque in due course. Yours faithfully, Jackson & Sons." The plaintiffs sold the stock but before the transfer could be registered, the registered owner, a Miss Lucas, objected to the registra tion of the transfer with the result that the Company refused to act on same. The plain tiffs suffered damage and held the defendants responsible to indemnify them as principals. The contract note sent by the plaintiffs to the defendants was headed " Sold for account of Messrs. Jackson & Sons. Commission divisible with above firm. Miss E. A. Lucas." It was proved on behalf of the defendants that the stock certificate was in the name of Miss Lucas, that the letter written by the stockbrokers with the contract note was headed " A/c. Miss E. A. Lucas," and that the contract note stated that the commission was to be shared be tween the defendants, and the plaintiffs, and these facts were relied upon as showing that the plaintiffs dealt with the defendants as agents for a disclosed principal. The House of Lords rejected this argument, holding that none of these facts was sufficient to displace the written authority contained in the defendants' letters quoted above and the terms of the contract note sent to and accepted by the . defendants and that they were therefore liable to indemnify the plaintiffs. Per Lord Atkin : " The fact that the plaintiffs supposed that the solicitors were acting for a client or knew that they were or even knew that the client was Miss Lucas (which is certainly doubtful) would have no effect to indicate that the plaintiffs were regarding the defendants as anything - but principals as against them."

ALL Communications connected with THE GAZETTE (other than advertisements, should be addressed to the Secretary of the Society, Solicitors' Buildings, Four Courts, Dublin, N.W.8.