The Gazette 1967/71

408 / 736

they were a delimitation on the general right of pro
perty.
(Central Dublin Development Association v. Attorney
General—Kenny J.—unreported)—6th October 1969.
Where Parliament has enacted two different ways of
preventing development which would interfere with road
widening schemes, one of which, under the Highways
Acts, provides for immediate payment of compensation
to the deprived frontager, and the other, under the
Town and Country Planning Acts, which does not pro
vide for compensation, a local authority is acting within
its powers if it refuses planning permission to a property
owner without compensation, on the ground that his
land may be required for a proposed road widening
scheme.
Westminster Berk Ltd. v. Ministers of Housing and
Local Government, House of Lords 26/2/'70.
Practice
Transfer of Prisoner
Accused found guilty of charge and sentenced to
three years imprisonment. The Supreme Court, per
O'Dalaigh, C. J., held:
1. That the Order of the Minister for Justice, trans
ferring the accused from St. Patrick's Institution
to Port Laoise Prison was bad, because the Minister
had exceeded his jurisdiction, on the basis that he
had stated in his Order that the boy, then 18
years of age, was incorrigible. The Visiting Com
mittee's Report did not refer to this but only to
"bad influence".
2. The Visiting Committee must not merely state their
conclusions in relation to a prisoner but give
reasons for their conclusions—in order to enable
the Minister to exercise his discretion properly.
The State (Brien) v. Governor of Portlaoise—Sup
reme Court—Unreported—9th May 1968.
Rating
The plaintiffs claimed rates in respect of transit sheds
owned by Defendants. Since 1903, the Defendants have
paid rates on sheds treated as warehouses, and allocated
to particular shipping lines, but they had not paid any
rates on transit sheds available to general users in the
port. In order to enable vessels to discharge cargo
rapidly and leave the port, the defendants entered into
a bond with the customs authorities whereby goods are
deposited in the sheds without customs examination,
and may subsequently be withdrawn after such examina
tion. The President, Mr. Justice O'Keeffe, having
examined the legal authorities in detail reached the
conclusion that the plaintiff's claim was not admissible,
because the defendants must put these sheds at the
disposal of the public, and cannot consequently be in
occupation of them.
Dublin Corporation v. Dublin Port and Docks Board—
unreported—14th May 1969.
About a hundred buildings used in combination with
1,150 acres o for the commercial enterprise of
rearing broiler ens on a wholesale scale are not
PYi»mr>t' frnm Kf»r*a i ic^ tV»<nr n t-o r\/-\t- "ir«-»-I,-,,1*>i.~** I
. . . used solely in connection with agricultural opera
tions thereon" within the definition in section 2 (2) of
the Rating and Valuation (Apportionment) Act 1928.
W. & R. J. Eastwood Ltd. v. Herrod (Valuation
Officer), House of Lords 25/2/'70.
Redundancy
A mineworker who worked a seven-day week for 20
years and then, when helping to rundown the colliery,
worked and was paid for a five-day week, was entitled
to redundancy payment based on a seven-day week, their
Lordships decided when allowing an appeal by Mr.
Clement Saxton and three other mineworkers of Barnsley
from the Industrial Tribunal at Leeds. The tribunal had
calculated the payment on a five-day week basis when
giving a decision last November that the men were not
entitled to further redundancy payments from the
National Coal Board.
Sexton and Others v. National Coal Board, Q.B.D.
10/3/70.
Shipping
When considering a collision at sea between two ships,
the Court held that section 1 of the Maritime Conven
tions Act, 1911, was mandatory in stating that liability
to make good the damage or loss should be in propor
tion to the degree in which each vessel is at fault, pro
vided that if it is not possible to establish different
degrees of fault the liability should be apportioned
equally. The court must apportion liability unless it was
impossible to do so.
The Anneliese Court >f Appeal ll/3/'70.
Solicitor—Professional Negligence
There is no duty on a solicitor acting for a firm to
communicate his advice to all the partners; it is sufficient
if he tenders his advice to the partner dealing with the
matter. A solicitor acting for a client in negotiations
for a lease of premises is under a duty to draw the
attention of his client to any unusual clause that may
affect the client's interest, even if the client is a pro
fessional man experienced in property transactions. But
even if a solicitor has negligently failed to draw his
client's attention to an unusual clause, his client cannot
recover more than nominal damages for breach of con
tract if he would probably have entered into the lease
anyhow and ignored proper advice had it been given.
Sykes v. Midland Bank Executor & Trustee Co. Ltd.
Tax
A tax appeal involving back duty assessments stretch
ing back to 1942-43 was remitted to a fresh panel of
general commissioners for a completely new hearing be
cause the original panel had refused an application for
adjournment on the ground of the taxpayer's ill-health
after a coronary thrombosis and a further operation.
Rose v. Humb!es (Inspector for Taxes). Chancery
Division 9/3/'70.
Trade Name
Park Court Hotel Ltd., the plaintiffs, who own Hotel ,v.i.....a Uiv..u,.i ..II.J u . nuicanic Ltl :t; di uui rani >_,ouri not i .Lt ., tn laintiffs, who own Hotel
exempt from ecause they are not "agricultural International in Lancaster Gate, S.W , were refused an
buildings . . . occupied together with agricultural land interlocutory injunction to restrain Trails-World Hotels