The Gazette 1971

196 / 196

Legal Remuneration—Central Costs Committee
proposed 33
External Control by broad-based Committee 33
Company Formation Service 34
Amalgamation and Partnership Service 34
Precedent Bank and Engrossment Service 34
Publications aided by Arthur Cox Foundation 34
European Economic Community 34
Increase in Solicitor's Remuneration 34
Evidence before Insurance Commission 34
Professional Liability Insurance Scheme 34
The Gazette 35
Ormrod Report 35
Objectives of Academic and Professional Stages ... 35
Signposts for the Future 36
Law as a System of Values 36>
Insurance Companies—Amount of Contribution
towards legal expenses of insured 36
King's Hospital—Escalating building costs 37
Our Law System and E.E.C.—(D. O'Malley) 161
One Hundred Years Ago
Obituary—Richard Atkinson 192
Paralysed Youth awarded £27,000 107
Practice Note—Third Party Procedure 26
Presentation of Certificates (May)—The Role of the
Lawyer 68
President's Address to New Solicitors (December) ... 177
The quest of justice 69
Meticulous and Conscientious dedication 69
The rule of law 69
Law the guardian of justice and liberty 69
Prices and Incomes Board Report—Solicitors Profits of
Conveyancing Excessive 16
Professional Liability Insurance 180
Rating of rents receivable by charity 107
The Register
Registration of Title Acts 27, 65, 108, 138, 166, 195
Regan, Mr. John (Mallow) struck off the Rolls 138
Scarman Tribunal may cost £400,000 89
Attorney General
Solicitors: conveyancing in contravention of section 20
of the Solicitors Act 1957: undertaking given in terms
of injunction sought.
Ch D— Pennycuick VC , 18th November 1971.
The settlement was announced in an action between
H M Attorney General at the relation of The Law
Society and Sydney George Carter of Kenton Lane,
Kenton, Middlesex. Sir Joseph Molony, QC , mention-
ing the settlement to Pennycuick VC , said that The
Law Society's claim was founded on s 20 of the Solici-
tors Act 1957. Mr. Carter was and had been the secre-
tary of an unincorporated body, the National House
Owners' Society, which existed for providing con-
veyancing services at a cheap rate. Mr. Carter had
been convicted twice for contravening s 20 but The
Law Society claimed that in spite of that he con-
tinued conveyancing unlawfully. The writ in the
present action was issued on 15 October 1968. The
relief sought was an injunction to restrain Mr. Carter
from continuing the breach of the law. Mr. Carter had
offered an undertaiing in the terms of the relief claimed
in the writ and the minutes of order had been pre-
Society of Young Solicitors 51, 137
Solicitors Apprentices Debating Society Reception 156
Special Awards 1971 179
Statutory Instruments
Agriculture, Lands and Fisheries 121
Commodities, Goods and Services 121
Conditions of Employment 121
Control of Exports and Imports 121
County and Town Management 121
Customs and Excise 121
Finance and Central Government 121
Harbours and Hydro-Electric Works 122
Health 12
Justice, Defence and External Affairs 122
Miscellaneous 122
Post Office 122
Parking Bye-Laws 122
Parking Temporary Rules 122
Speed Limits Regulations 123
Transport and Traffic 122
Traffic and Parking Bye-Laws 122
Traffic and Parking Temporary Rules 122
Traffic Temporary Rules 123
Courts (Supplemental Provisions) Act 1961 (Sec-
tion 46) Order 1961 increasing remuneration of
Judges 102
Solicitors Accounts (Amendment) Regulations
Rules o fthe Superior Courts (No. 2) 1971—re
Appeals under Redundancy Payments Act 1967 121
Solicitors Act 1954 (Apprenticeship and Education)
(Amendment) Regulations 1971 121
Rules of the Superior Courts (No. 2) 1971—re
increase in costs of shorthand writers 157
U.S. Supreme Court Ruling—blow to school children
segregation 53
Undertakings by solicitors to Banks—Personal respon-
sibility of solicitors 137
Unqualified Practitioner 198
v. Carter
pared in the following terms: that Mr. Carter would
not contravene or attempt to contravene s 20 by (a)
drawing or preparing any instrument of transfer or
charge for the purposes of the Land Registration Act
1925 or any other instrument (as defined in the
section) relating to real or personal estate for or in
expectation of any fee, gain or reward otherwise than
by the agency of a person who was for the time being
a qualified or excepted person for the purposes of the
section; (b) causing or procuring the drawing or pre-
paration of any such instrument as aforesaid otherwise
than as aforesaid; and (c) holding out himself or other
persons (except persons who were qualified or
exempted persons for the purposes of the section) as
being willing or entitled to draw or prepare any such
instruments as aforesaid.
Mr. Anthony Lester, for Mr. Carter, concurred and
added that at no time since October 1967 had Mr.
Carter been in breach of the provisions of s 20. Mr.
Carter had been influenced to give the undertakings by
the fact that even a defendant in a relator action was
not a candidate under the Legal Aid and Advice Act
1949.
198