57 / 216
F- FEBRUARY, 1922]
The Gazette of the Incorporated Law Society of Ireland.
49
1st day of January, 1920, pursuant to the
General Orders
under
the
Solicitors
Remuneration Act of 16th April, 1884, and
17th May, 1920, and these charges are now
allowed at those rates on taxation.]
KING'S BENCH DIVISION (ENGLAND).
(Before LUSH, J.)
La Roche
v.
Armstrong.
Jan. 19,
1922.—Solicitor and Client
—
Evidence
—Letters marked " without prejudice "
—
Negotiations for settlement—Sum ofmoney
handed by client to Solicitor
—
Claim by
Third Party against Solicitor—Admis-
sibility of letters—Verbal admission by
client — Admissibility
—
Protection
of
Solicitor—Implied trust.
On the 23rd March, 1920, the plaintiff's
son died abroad. For some time previously
the deceased had been engaged to be married
to Miss B.
Shortly before his death the
deceased had sent to Miss B. in London £200,
and it was alleged by the plaintiff, who sued
as administrator of his son's estate, that this
money was sent to her for the purpose of
furnishing a flat for their occupation after
their
intended marriage.
The plaintiff
accordingly claimed that the money remained
the property of
the deceased, and that
Miss B. held it as part of the estate of the
deceased in trust for and as money received
to the use of the plaintiff as administrator
of the estate of his deceased son. On the
other hand, Miss B. alleged that the money
was given to her for her personal use, and
she handed part of
the money
to her
Solicitor, who was the defendant in the action.
Certain letters were written by the defendant
as Miss B.'s Solicitor
to
the pliantiff's
Solicitors. The letters were marked '' without
prejudice," and one of them contained an
offer on behalf of his client to pay over to
the plaintiff the balance of the £200 which
she had received from the deceased, and
stating that the balance in her hands was now
£115, and another contained an admission
that Miss B. had handed over
to
the
defendant the £115.
It was sought on behalf
of the plaintiff to put these letters in evidence
as well as certain verbal admissions which
had been made by the defendant's client in
the absence of the defendant, with regard to
how she had received and dealt with the
money.
Held,
that the general principle with regard
to
letters written
" without prejudice"
applied just as much for the protection of
the Solicitor as for his client, and that
neither the letters nor the verbal admissions
of the client made in the absence of her
Solicitor were admissible against the Solicitor
in the circumstance of this case.
(Reported
The Law Times,
Feb. 4, 1922.)
ALL communications connected with THE
GAZETTE (other than advertisements) should
be addressed to the Secretary of the Society,
Solicitors' Buildings, Four Courts, Dublin.