270 / 294
CURRENT L AW DIGEST SELECTED
All references to dates relate to
The Times
newspaper.
In reading these cases note should be taken of the
differences in English and Irish statute law.
Bills of Exchange
Before Lord Reid, Viscount Dilhorne, Lord Diplock, Lord
Simon of Glaidale and Lord Corss of Ghelsea.
The holders of a bill of exchange who knew that it would
be dishonoured on presentation on the due date but through
a clerical error posted the necessary notice of dishonour
early so that it was delivered to the drawer by the same post
as the bill was delivered to the bank and dishonoured were
held to be entitled to payment on the bill. A majority of the
House of Lords decided that where the evidence did not show
which of the two pieces of paper—the bill and the notice of
dishonour—was received first, it was to be presumed that
they took place in the order which would make the notice
valid. Applying that presumption the House hold that the
dishonour of the bill preceded the notice so that the notice
was good.
Eaglehill Ltd. v. J. Needham, Builders, Ltd. 26/10/72;
House of Lords.
Contract
Before Lord Denning, the Master of the Rolls, Lord Justice
Buckley and Lord Justice Orr.
An indemnity clause in the Road Haulage Association's
Conditions of Carriage (1967 revision) which provides that
"The trader shall . . . keep the carrier indemnified against all
claims or demands whatsoever" in excess of £10 on any one
consignment was construed by the Court of Appeal as wide
enough to require a trader to indemnify the carrier against a
claim for £998 for the loss of three gold watches arising
out of the negligence of the carrier's own servant.
Gillespie Bros. & Co. Ltd. v. Roy Bowles Transport Ltd.
and Rennie Hogg, Ltd.; 25/10/72; C.A.
Before Lord Denning, the Master of the Rolls, Lord Justice
Edmund Davies and Lord Justice Stephenson.
The RIBA Standard Form of Building Contract Local
Authorities Edition with Quantities (1968 revision) was
strongly criticized by the court as "a farrago of obscurities"
and the redrafting of some of its clauses recommended to
make clear precisely what had to be done to constitute taking
possession of a part of works in progress, with consequential
shift of fire insurance risks, where the parties know that a
factory will continue working during building operations.
English Industrial Estates Corporation v. George Wimpey
& Co. Ltd. 3/11/72; C.A.
Crime
Before Lord Justice Lawton, Mr. Justice Chapman and Mr.
Justice Wien.
[Judgment delivered October 20th]
The court certified that a point of law of general public
importance was involved in their decision to dismiss appeals
against conviction under section 25(1) of the Immigration
Act, 1971, namely, "Whether the offence created by section
25(1) of being knowingly concerned in carrying out arrange-
ments for facilitating entry into the United Kingdom of any-
one whom he knows or has reasonable cause for believing
to be an illegal entrant may be committed by actions of the
accused performed after the time of disembarkation of an
illegal entrant".
Regina v. Singh; Regina v. Meeuwsen; 23/10/72; C.A.
Before Lord Justice Lawton, Mr. Justice Chapman and Mr.
Justice Wien.
A man who was sentenced to three months' imprisonment
for driving 25 yards while disqualified—which he has already
served—was given in substitution a one day's sentence, which
meant his immediate discharge. An order activating a six
months' suspended sentence, which he had already begun to
serve, was quashed, thus leaving the suspended sentence still
running.
Regina v. Smithers; 19/10/72; C.A
Damages
Before Lord Denning, the Master of the Rolls, Lord Justice
Megaw and Sir Gordon Willmer.
Where a girl's prospects of marriage have been diminished
as a result of personal injuries, the courts in following the
present practice of assessing the damages under itemized
headings should guard against the danger of overlapping and
should not include the diminished prospects of marriage under
more than one heading.
Harris (an infant) v. Harris; 11/11/72; C.A.
Damages for breach of contract to provide a winter sports
holiday are not confined to matters of physical inconvenience
and discomfort but may include damages for the disappoint-
ment and frustration for not obtaining what was promised.
Jarvis v. Swan Tours, Ltd.; 19/10/72; C.A.
Easements
Before Lord Justice Russell, Lord Justice Edmund Davies
and Lord Justice Stamp.
[Judgment delivered October 31st]
A servient owner's undertaking to repair and maintain
ramps, placed on a right of way to stop cars being driven at
an excessive speed, is a sufficient remedy for the owner of the
dominant tenement because the successor in title to the
owner of the servient tenement will be liable for a dis-
turbance of the easement if he lets the roadway fall into
disrepair so that the ramps become a substantial interference
with the right of way.
Saint & Another v. Jenner & Another; 6/11/72; C.A.
Estate Agents
Held that estate agents who had received a pre-contract
deposit which was returned to the intending purchaser when
the sale fell through were entitled to retain interest which
they had received by placing the money on deposit with their
bankers.
Potters (a firm) v. Loppert; 9/11/72; C.D.
Evidence
Before Lord Justice Karminski, Mr. Justice O'Connor and
Mr. Justice Forbes.
[Judgment delivered October 20th]
The transcript of evidence given by a witness at a trial
which ended in the jury disagreeing and who died before the
retrial took place was held to be admissible at the new
trial.
Regina v. Hall; 23/10/72; C.A.
Master and Servant
Before Lord Denning, the Master of the Rolls, Lord Justice
Megaw and Sir Gordon Willmer.
An employee who was given notice of dismissal before ihe
sections of the Industrial Relations Act, 1971, which give a
rght to compensation for unfair dismissal came into force,
can bring an action against her employers for unfair dismissal
where the notice given expired after the sections came into
operation, for on the proper interpretation of section 23(2) the
contract under which she was employed was terminated on the
date when the notice expired.
H. W. Smith (Cabinets) Ltd. v. Brindle; 8/11/72; C.A.
Negligence
Before Lord Reid, Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest, Viscount
Dilhorne, Lord Simon of Glaisdale and Lord Cross of
Chelsea.
A widow who had committed adultery and deserted her
husband five weeks before he was killed in a road accident
failed in her appeal to the House of Lords from decisions
dismissing her claim for damages under the Fatal Accidents
Acts, 1846-1959, because she had not shown that if he had
lived there was a reasonable expectation of a reconciliation.
Davies v. Taylor; 25/10/72; House of Lords.
- 2 7 4