72 / 132
The Gazette of the Incorporated Law Society of Ireland.
[DEC., 1908
Recent Decisions affecting Solicitors.
(Notes ofdecisions, whether in reported or unreported
cases, of interest to Solicitors, are invited from
Members.']
KING'S BENCH DIVISION.
(Before Gibson, Madden, and Kenny, JJ.)
The King (Moivbray and Sfourton)
v.
Local
Government Boardfor Ireland.
Nov.
10, n, 16, 1908—
Local Government—
Labourers Acts—Costs—Taxation of-—Solicitor.
THE Local Government Board for Ireland
made a Rule (No. 55 of the Labourers (Ireland)
Order, 1906) under s. 31 of the Labourers
(Ireland) Act, 1906, in the following terms :—
"Where costs are payable by a council to an
owner or lessee of land in respect" of giving
proof of title to any plot by such owner or
lessee such costs shall be referred to the Local
Government Board, who shall arrange for the
taxation of the same, and the sum which, after
taxation, the Board may certify shall be the
sum payable in respect of such costs." The
Board claimed that they were entitled under
and by virtue of such Order and the Labourers
(Ireland) Act, 1906, to refer the costs incurred
by an owner in making title to land, com-
pulsorily taken in pursuance of the Act, to their
solicitor for taxation, and not to the Taxing
Master of the High Court; and further, that
they were not bound to permit the solicitor for
such owner to be present at such taxation, or
to furnish him with any particulars as to the
items of deduction, -or the manner in which
such were made.
Held,
that even assuming that s. 31 of the
Labourers (Ireland) Act, 1906, includes con
veyancing and title costs, and authorizes the
Local Government Board to appoint a new
taxing authority—(i) it does not authorize the
Board to retain the taxation in their own
hands, and refer to their solicitors for advice
and assistance in such taxation, and that the
order was therefore
ultra vires
; (2) in any taxa
tion conducted in pursuance of s. 31 of the
Act of 1906 the vendor's solicitors are entitled
to be present, if they so choose, to explain or
defend the various items of their bill of costs ;
(3) the Local Government Board have no right
in a taxation of title costs to give directions to
the taxing authority as to how he shall tax, as
such taxing authority should be independent;
(4) the certificate of taxation in this case being
in the nature of an order for payment was a
proper subject of
certiorari.
Motion to make absolute a conditional order.
In the year 1907 the Dunshaughlin Rural
District Council, by virtue of a Provisional
Order under the Labourers (Ireland) Acts, 1883
to 1906, took compulsorily two acres of the
land of Branstown as sites for labourers'
cottages. These lands belonged to Mary
Margaret Lady Mowbray and Stourton. The
arbitrator awarded the sum of
£ji Bs.
as com
pensation. The vendor's solicitors furnished,
by request, an abstract of title to the solicitor
for the council. When the conveyance was
ready for completion, the vendor's solicitors
notified the solicitor for the council that they
were prepared to complete on receipt of a
cheque for the amount of compensation and
their costs, and at the same time enclosed
their bill of costs for showing title to the lands.
The amount of this bill was ^8 13^.
6d.
On
March 30, 1908, the solicitor to the rural
council replied, acknowledging receipt of bill
of costs, and stating that the bill of costs would
be submitted to the Local Government Board
in accordance with Rule 55 of the Labourers
Order, 1906. On April 3, 1908, Messrs. T. T.
Mecredy & Sons, solicitors to. the Local
Government Board, wrote to the vendor's
solicitors stating that the bill of costs had
been referred to them for taxation by the
Local Government Board, and that they were
prepared to certify the said bill on receipt
of a sum of
~js. 6d.,
their fee for taxation.
Messrs. Wm. Roche & Son (vendor's solicitors)
replied to this letter on April 3, 1908, enclosing
cheque for the amount demanded, and request
ing that, before certifying the costs, if any
deductions should be made, they might have
an opportunity of dealing with them, and
further protesting against the arrangement,
made by the Local Government Board, under
which landlords' costs were taxed without
affording the solicitor whose bill was being
taxed an opportunity of explaining any of the-
items. Messrs. Mecredy replied to this letter
on April 4, 1908, by a communication in which
they acknowledged receipt of the 7.?. 6</., and
stated that they had returned the bill of costs
to the Local Government Board, that they
themselves kept no note of the deductions,
that the Local Government Board did not
consider it necessary that parties interested
should attend the taxation, and also that it
was " not the practice of the Board to indicate
how the amount of their certificate of taxation
had been arrived at." On April 16, 1908,
the solicitor to the rural council wrote to
Messrs. Roche informing them that he had