The Gazette 1972

CURRENT LAW DIGEST SELECTED

In reading these cases note should be taken of the

differences in English and Irish Statute Law.

Shipping

L-lause 13 in the Baltic charterparty, stated to have been in

general commercial use since at least 1909, which exempts ship-

owners from liability for "damage or delay whatsoever and

howsoever caused, even if caused by the neglect or default of

their servants" was held to protect shipowners against claims by

charterers for financial losses sutsained as a result of the ship's

"faster wrongfully refusing to take the vessel into a Nicaraguan

Port during the currency of the charterparty. The word "dam-

age" in the context of that clause, the court held, was not

hmited to physical damage or loss.

[The Charalambos A Pateres; C. of A.; 13/10/1971.]

Social Welfare

Where the officers and tribunals appointed under the National

Insurance (Industrial Injuries) Acts to decide whether an

insured person is entitled to injury benefit, because of injury

through accident at work, decide the nature of the injury, that

decision is "final" and binds the medical authorities who have

nder the Acts to decide whether the injured person is entitled

to disablement benefit.

[Jones v Secretary of State for Social Services; Hudson v

Same; H. of L.; 20/12/1971.]

An inspector appointed by the Minister under Section 90 of the

National Insurance Act, 1965, has power to require an insured

Person to furnish information as to the name and address of his

employer when such a person claims to be employed under a

contract of service.

[Smith v Hawkins; Q.B.D.; 15/11/1971.]

Solicitors

A solicitor's lien on his client's deeds is based on possession, and

jt there is a voluntary parting with possession, not brought about

y any wrongdoing, the lien will be lost unless the parting with

Possession is accompanied by some effective arrangement which

Preserves possession for the solicitor, such as an agreement to

hold the deeds on his behalf.

. Megarry J. in a

reserved judgment, refused to grant

.tcrlocutory injunctions restraining the solicitors for the

Plaintiff in the action from paying to Mrs. Caldwell

any third party on her behalf £1,250 now held by the solici-

ors and representing part of the proceeds of sale of a house in

Brighton. The motion was issued by the defendants, Sumpters

la firm).

His Lordship said that the matter arose out of the proposed

•ale of a house in Brighton owned by Mrs. Caldwell. She iriten-

oed Sumpters to act for her and left the title deeds with them

j°r the purpose. The sale was delayed by difficulties in obtain-

«8 vacant possession and in the end Mrs. Caldwell instructed

present solicitors in place of Sumpters. They pressed

oumpters for the title deeds, but Sumpters claimed a solicitor's

«en on them.

The auestion of lien turned on a single sentence in a letter

J^ted 15th January 1970 from Sumpters to Mrs. Caldwell's

solicitors enclosing the deeds. The sentence was: "These deeds

nd documents are being sent to you on the understanding that

;jj h^d them to our order, pending the payment of our

*®

and your undertakings which we have given on behalf of

^rs- Caldwell, on her instructions, and the payment of fees,

c-.of

other professional firms who have acted on Mrs. Cald-

instructions and have not yet been paid by her."

I97n Caldwell's solicitors replied promptly on 20th January

(cl • referring to the fact that the writ had already been issued

deeds and damages for their retention, an account

1 ^arious rents and profits, and payment of what was due). The

w e n t

on: "In the circumstances we are unable to accede

. your request eithert o hold the deeds to your order or to

our undertakings as mentioned by you."

982]

dwe11 V S u m p t e r s

(

a fintl

D i v

' U971) 3 AER

dif!'

t0rs

had a lien over deeds belonging to a former client

not lose it by sending them to her new solicitors under cover

" I a

- i - i!

il i .1

..1

1 *

The court allowed an appeal by the defendants from the

refusal of Mister Justice Megarry ([1971] 3 WLR 309]

to grant them i njunctions restraining Margolis and Co.,

the present solicitors of Mrs. D. M. Caldwell, from paying

to her or to any third party on her behalf £1,250 now held by

them and restraining her from causing or allowing them to do

so.

[Caldwell v Sumpters (a firm) and Another; C. of A.;

(Salmon and Scamal J.J.); (1972) 1 AER 567.]

Succession

The principle that a wife is entitled to share with her husband

in property or the proceeds of property bought out of the profits

of a business which she helped him to build up without receiving

wages applies also where the husband has died and the wife

claims a like share in the assets standing in the husband's name

immediately before his death, even though the claim is against

the estate of a dead man who had left a will.

[In re Cummins (deceased); C. of A.; 13/7/1971.]

Tax Law

A transfer of shares worth £7,000 by a controlling shareholder

as consideration for the taxpayer's agreement to enter into

service with the company was held not to he a taxable emolu-

ment. Megarry J. upheld a decision by the special commis-

sioners in favour of Mr. C. L. Arundale, joint managing director

of Kenneth Lowe (Holdings) Ltd.

rPritchard (Inspector of Taxes) v Arundale; Ch. Div.;

(1971) 3 AER 1011.]

Schemes of "forward dividend stripping" entered into by the

appellant taxpayers, Mr. H. Greenberg and Mr. W. A. Tunni-

cliffe, failed in that instalments of the purchase price of shares

paid to them by finance companies after 5th April 1960 were

liable to tax.

Their Lordships dismissed appeals by the taxpayers from deci-

sions of the Court of Appeal in November 1969 ([1971] Ch.

286) allowing appeals by the Inland Revenue Commissioners

from decisions of Mr. Justice Buckley.

TGreenberg v Inland Revenue Commissioners; Tunnicliffe v

Inland Revenue Commissioners; House of Lords; (1971) 3

AER 136.]

The Incorporated Council of Law Reporting for England and

Wales, which published the

Law Reports

and the

Weekly Law

Reports,

is a charity within the Charities Act, 1960. Their

Lordships, in reserved judgments, dismissed an appeal by the

Commissioners of Inland Revenue from a decision of Mr.

Justice Foster

(The Times,

4th December 1970; [1971] Ch.

626) granting a declaration that the Council was entitled to

registration as a charity under Section 4 of the Act. Leave to

appeal to the House of Lords was refused.

[Incorporated Council of Law Reporting v Attorney-General;

G. of A.; (1971) 3 AER 1029.]

All civil servants employed abroad, apart from those whose

duties have no public content such as ambassadors' valets, are

prima facie liable to United Kingdom income tax on their

emolumets even though not remitted.

His Lordship dismissed an appeal by Mr. W. Graham against

assessments to income tax in respect of years when he was a

civil servant employed wholly abroad. For part of the time he

was working in Brunei, where there was no tax.

[Graham v White (Inspector of Taxes); Ch. Div.; 7/12/71.]

A mortgage of property followed by a conveyance of the equity

of redemption to the mortgagee in consideration of the release

of the mortgagor from the obligation to repay the mortgage

amounted to a disposal of the property giving rise to a charge-

able gain for the purposes of Case VII of Schedule D (short-

term capital gains tax).

His Lordship so held in allowing an appeal by the Crown

from a determination of the General Commissioners for Central

Birmingham that the taxpayer, Mohammed Salah, was not

liable to pay tax under Case VII in respect of a gain realised

by his wife as a result of such transactions.

[Thompson (Inspector of Taxes) v Salah; Ch. Div.;

30/11/1971.]

, a letter stating that they were sent "on the understanding

you will hold them to our order".

Flowers dried to last indefinitely and artistically arranged in