49 / 142
APRIL, 1928]
The Gazette of the Incorporated Law Society of Ireland.
45
•of notice of appeal defendant threatened to
distrain for the costs of dismiss, and plaintiff's
Solicitor paid the amount of costs to the
defendants' Solicitors at their request. The
appeal was allowed, and
the defendant
(White) ordered to pay the costs of the action
and of the appeal. Neither the defendant
(White) nor his Solicitors (J. Beatty and
W. Beatty) would refund the amount paid
for costs of the Circuit Court proceedings, and
the plaintiff sued them both by summary
summons for
£39 4s.
lid. for money payable
by the defendants for the use of the plaintiff,
being the amount of the taxed costs of White
of a dismiss in an action by the plaintiff,
Burke, against the defendant (White) as
defendant in the Circuit Court of Dublin, and
which dismiss was reversed with costs by the
Special Commissioners on appeal.
Held,
that the amount could not be
recovered from the defendants' Solicitors, as
a Solicitor receiving money on behalf of a
client does so as his agent, and the ordinary
rules of
law applicable to principal and
agent apply ;
but held that the money could
be recovered from the defendant (White) as
money received to the plaintiff's use.
Judgment given for the full amount, with
costs, against the defendant (White), and
judgment given in favour of the defendants
(J. and W. Beatty, Solicitors) dismissing the
claim against them without costs.
(Reported
The Irish Reports
[1928], I. R.,
page 91.)
ALL communications connected with THE
GAZETTE (other than advertisements) should
be addressed to the Secretary of the Society,
45 Kildare Street, Dublin, C.17.
IRISH FREE STATE.
HIGH COURT.
BAIRD
v.
MURPHY.
(Before Sullivan, P. ; Meredith and
O'Byrne, J.J.)
1927, Oct. 11, 13 ; Dec.
8.—Practice—Juris
diction
of Master
—
Appointment
of
Receiver by way of equitable execution.
The plaintiff had applied to the Master of
the High Court for an order appointing a
Receiver by way of equitable execution over
the pension payable
to defendant.
The
Master had marked the motion docket " No
order for want of jurisdiction." The plaintiff
applied to the High Court to discharge the
Master's order or to make the order sought.
Held
unanimously, that the jurisdiction
conferred on the Master by Order XIII,
r. 2 (1) to make " any order which under the
practice heretofore in force might have been
made as of course " did not confer juris
diction to make any order " which might
have been made on an
ex parte
application,"
and that the Master was right in holding
that he had no jurisdiction to make the order
sought.
(Reported
The Irish Reports
[1928], I. R.,
page 125.)
THE SOCIETY'S CALENDAR.
The Calendar and Law Directory of the
Society for 1928 can be obtained in the
Secretary's Office, 45 Kildare Street, Dublin,
price five shillings; by post, five shillings
and sixpence.