137 / 294
Insurance
Mistakes made by an insurance company's agent in carrying
out his instructions to ask the questions on the proposal form
and himself write down the answers were held by the Court, on
the special facts of the case, to make the company liable to
pay out on a claim by the insured whose wife had signed the
form so filled in.
After giving its decision the Court was asked by counsel for
the insurance company for leave to appeal to the House of
Lords. It was, he said, more or less the standard practice of
many insurance companies to instruct their agents to write
down the answers in proposal forms for "countless thousands"
of small industrial and other policies; and the court's present
decision would have the gravest bearing on the whole conduct
of such policies. The court refused leave.
[Stone v Reliance Mutual Insurance Society Ltd.; C.A.;
14/3/1972.]
Landlord and Tenant
The Court of Appeal, on an appeal by Accountancy Personnel
Ltd., an employment agency, tenants of the first and second
floors of 51 Cannon Street, EC, extended by three months the
date on which Judge Rogers, in the Mayor's and City of
London Court last July, decided that they should vacate the
premises on the ground that their landlords, the Worshipful
Company of Salters and their partners, Electricity Supply
Nominees Ltd., owners of the freehold of those premises and
large areas of the surrounding land, had established under
Section 30 (1) (f) of the Landlord and Tenant Act, 1954,
that they intended on the termination of the current tenancy
to demolish the premises.
[Accountancy Personnel Ltd. v Worshipful Company of
Salters; C.A; 7/3/1972.]
Licensing
A licensee was held to have "knowingly" sold drinks to an
under-age person in the lounge of the public house even
though the sale was made by a barman to whom complete
control of the lounge had been delegated and the licensee,
who was serving in the public bar, had no actual knowledge of
what happened.
[Howker v Robinson; QBD; Div. Ct.; 21/3/1972.]
Natural Justice
See under
Tax;
Pearlberg v Varty (Inspector of Taxes);
House of Lords; 24/3/1972.
Negligence
A driver who admitted taking no precautions when he realised
that a woman pedestrian who was about to cross the road in
front of his car had not seen him was held one-third respon-
sible for her injuries when she was knocked down.
[Williams v Needham; QBD; Judge Stebb; 7/3/1972.]
A widow failed to recover damages for the death of her hus-
band who was trapped and fatally injured when his articu-
lated lorry was sandwiched between two other large lorries
in a concertina accident on the Ml in January 1968. The
injuries which led to his death were held to have been entirely
caused by the impact with the lorry in front and not by the
subsequent impact of the lorry from behind.
TSmith v Samuel Williams and Son Ltd. and Another;
QBD; Bristow J.; 2/3/1972]
Planning
•Notice of appeal against an enforcement notice must be given
to the Minister within the time specified in Section 16 of the
Town and Country Planning Act, 1968, and, since it was a
matter that went to the jurisdiction, there was no power to
extend the time.
Howard v Secretary of State for the Environment; QBD;
Bristow J.; 29/3/1972.]
Procedure
The proper place to apply for an interim injunction is the
High Court in London and not the county court, where a
claim for an injunction is only permissible when it is ancillary
to a claim for damages.
[Arnbridge (Reading) Ltd. (trading as Manpower (Read-
ing) Ltd.) v Hedges and Others; C.A.; 16/3/1972.]
Rating
A house owned by Bexley Congregational Church which was
vacant for 11 months but held available by the church as an
official residence for the minister was held not to be liable for
rates during the period it was empty.
[Bexley Congregational Church Treasurer v Bexley London
Borough; C.A.; 23/3//1972.]
Redundancy»
An employee who is unable to work at the time of his dis-
missal because of illness may still be entitled to a redundancy
payment. Therefore, a shipyard fitter who, because of illness,
had been off work for 18 months, during which time he
received no wages but might recover, was held to be entitled
to a redundancy payment when the shipyard was closed.
[Marshall v Harland and Wolff Ltd.; National Industrial
Relations Court; 13/3/1972.]
Solicitors
Mr. R. H. Douglas, of Bournemouth, lost an appeal against
the finding of the Disciplinary Committee of the Law Society,
constituted under the Solicitors' Acts, 1957-1965, on 13 Jan.
1972, that he was guilty of professional misconduct and/or
conduct unbefitting a solicitor in that he had breached Rules
1 and 2 of the Solicitors' Practice Rules, 1936, when he said
that he had taken employment with the National House
Owners Society as an agent in relation to their members'
conveyancing work, and as a solicitor for the internal purposes
of the society. The committee had fined him £750.
Rule 1 provides: "A solicitor shall not directly or indirectly
apply for or seek instructions for professional business . •
Rule 2 provides: "A solicitor shall not hold himself out or
allow himself to be held out directly or indirectly . . . as being
prepared to do professional business . . . in non-contentious
matters at less than the scale fixed . . . "
[In re a Solicitor; QBD; Div. Ct.; 13/3/1972.]
A solicitor may justifiably be found guilty of professional mis-
conduct if he keeps his books of account in such a way that it
is not possible to ascertain readily at any one time the balance
held on account of each individual client even though he has
been completely honest throughout.
Their Lordships so held on an appeal by a solicitor from
the dismissal by the Queen's Bench Divisional Court on 14
February of his appeal from the findings and order of the
Disciplinary Committee of the Law Society that he should be
suspended from practice for six months for failure to comply
with the Solicitors' Accounts Rules and for professional mis-
conduct as stated above. But the court lifted the suspension
order on being satisfied that the solicitor's books were now in
order and up to date. He was ordered to pay all the Law
Society's costs of all the proceedings.
[In re a Solicitor; C.A.; 29/3/1972.]
Succession
The will of an 82-year-old woman by which she left her whole
estate of £3,144 to a cancer research charity was held to
a disposition under the Family Provision Act, 1966, which did
not make reasonable provision for an incapacitated son living
on State assistance. The court ordered that the son should
have 11/12ths and the charity l/12th of the balance of the
etate. They also ordered the charity to pay the costs of the
appeal.
[Millward v Shenton and Another; C.A.; 24/3/1972.]
Tax
Natural justice does not require that a taxpayer who has not
made returns of income for many yean shall be present and be
heard when his inspector of taxes applies for leave under
Section 6 of the Income Tax Management Act. 1964, to raise
late assessments. The commissioner when deciding whether or
not to grant leave is performing an administrative and not *
judicial function, and the taxpayer will have an opportnity
of being heard if and when he appeals against any assessments
" made.
TPearlberg v Varty (Inspector of Taxes); House of Lords;
24/3/1972.]
A bonus of £1,000 and money prizes given to Bobby Moor
c
-
captain of the victorious English team in the World Cup
1966 were held to he payments having the
quality of test»-
monials,
marking his participation in an exceptional even]»
and
not Payments made in reward or remuneration for
nt»
services.
Accordingly they were not. assessable to income ta*
under Schedule F. of the Income Tax Act, 1952.
[Moore v Griffiths; Ch. Div.; Brightman J.; 24/3/1972.]
136