The Gazette 1908-9

The Gazette of the Incorporated Law Society of Ireland.

[DEC., 1908

costs of making out title—which

prima facie

should be borne by the public body which

acquires the land.

In the case before us, the

owner's costs, as drawn by his solicitors, a firm

of high standing in the profession, amounted

t°

£9

!•?•

od.

They were cut down behind the

solicitors' back, and without explanation or

excuse, to ^4 i

is. \d.,

while the uncontradicted

affidavit on which the application for a

cerliorari

is based, states that the bill as furnished was

drawn in accordance with the schedules of fees

and charges authorized by the Supreme Court.

If that statement be accurate, and I have no

reason to doubt it, the balance of the solicitors'

costs will have to be made good to them by

their client, the applicant in the present case.

It is not unimportant to bear in mind that such

balance—if the costs be taxed as between the

applicant and his solicitors—will be so taxed

with reference to the Supreme Court scale, and

will not be subject to the unfettered discretion

of the Local Government Board or any person

employed by them as assessor or adjuster.

Furthermore, this inconsistency would arise if

the Act and Rule have effected the revolution

in procedure contended

for by the Local

Government Board, that, if the compensation

money were paid into Court and was afterwards

paid out to the parties eniitled to it, the costs

of showing title would, under a High Court

order, be taxed in the ordinary way by one of

the taxing masters, and under a County Court

order might in certain cases be taxed in accord

ance with the rules and schedule of fees relating

to Equity proceedings in the County Courts

(County Court Rules under the Labourers Act,

Nos. 14 and 15). That this must be so, is, I

think, clear.

It has not been, and in my

opinion could not be, contended that costs of

proving title awarded under an order of the

High Court, or of the County Court, were to

be "referred to the Board" under the 55th

Rule in cases where the amount of the com-

'pensation was lodged in Court.

If, therefore, the ssth Rule is applicable

only to bills of costs where the amount of the

compensation has not to be brought

into

C'ourt, it is effective for the purpose put for

ward by the Local Government Board of (i)

making the Local Government Board

the

taxing authority, or (2) enabling the Local

Government Board to set up any sort of taxing

authority that it chooses, and (3) rendering

legal a taxation conducted

exparte

and with

out reference to any recognized schedules of

fees and charges. While desiring to guard

myself against expressing a definite opinion as

to the class of rule which the Local Govern

ment Board may legitimately make under the

provisions of the 3ist section of the Labourers

Act, I am very clearly of opinion that a Rule

which purported to sanction a secret taxation,

unfettered by any scale of fees and charges,

would be

ultra vires.

It would require very

clear language in an Act of Parliament to

deprive the land-owner of the statutory right,

which he hitherto enjoyed, of having an open

taxation conducted by an officer bound to have

regard to a certain standard of charges. I can

find no such clearness in the words of the

section "provide for taxation." Even if the

section enables a Rule to be made, nominating

a person other than the taxing officer of the

Supreme Court to assume the functions of the

latter, as to which I entertain very great doubt,

it would be strange indeed, in the absence of

express language,

it should be held to

authorize a departure also from the methods

of taxation theretofore in practice. There has

not, in my opinion, been any taxation of the

applicant's bill of costs, and, consequently, the

certificate of the Local Government Board was

unwarranted.

As to

cerliorari

being applicable to the pre

sent case, I concur with the judgment of the

other members of the Court, and have nothing

to add.

Reported in I.L.T.R., Vol. XLII., page 255.

NOTE.—Notice of appeal against the above

decision of the King's Bench Division has

been served upon behalf of the Local Govern

ment Board.

COURT OF THIL IRISH LAND COMMISSION.

IRISH LAND ACT, 1903.

(Before Wylie, J.)

IN CHAMBER.

Estate of Nicholas Ffolliott Giles and Others.

$lh November,

1908.

APPLICATION upon behalf of W. J. Byrne (the

owner of a superior rent which had been re

deemed) by way of appeal from the taxation of

applicant's costs of making title to the redemp

tion money, which costs had been taxed under

the order in this matter of zgth June, 1908, by

the taxing officer of the Land Commission,

for an order declaring that on the true con

struction of the schedule of fees pursuant to

the rules of the 4th December, 1903, an

"affidavit of title" should be treated as an

" abstract of title," and that in consequence