421 / 736
into with the intention of creating legal relations and
to be binding on the husband.
Merritt v. Merritt. C. of A. 27/4/70.
Gaming and Lotteries
A decision by the Gaming Beard, set up under the
Gaming Act, 1968, which faces Crockford's, the century-
old gaming
club
in Carlton House Terrace, with
extinction, was held to have been fair and not contrary
to natural justice.
The Court said that in general it would interfere with
decisions by the board if they were not fair. The board
should disclose to an applicant for a certificate of consent
to apply for a gaming club licence sufficient information
about any objections they might have as to his suitability
to run a club to enable him to answer any case against
him. But they were not bound to disclose the sources of
their information lest doing so should put the informant
in peril or deter a person from giving information.
Regina v. Gaming Board for Great Britain Ex Parte
Barain and Khaida. C. of A. 23/4/70.
Landlord and Tenant
A farming partnership deed between father and son
stated that the partnership capital was to consist of the
stock, machinery and other " assets '' of the business of
farmer carried on by the father at an agricultural holding
but did not specifically refer to the farm lease, so that
the lease did not become vested in the partnership and
accordingly, a notice to quit under section 24 (2) (g)
of the Holdings Act, 1948, was valid and effective, Mr.
Justice Nield decided
in a
judgment reserved from
Chester Assizes.
Eardley and Another v. Broed and Another. Q.B.D.
27/4/70.
Services not quantified in terms of money cannot
amount to " rent" within the meaning of the Rent Acts,
their Lordships decided in allowing an appeal by the
plaintiff landlords against the refusal of Judge Trapnell
at Bromley County Court last July to grant them posses
sion of rooms occupied by the defendants, in a house in
Bromley.
Barnes v. Barratt. C. of A. 14/3/70.
When a landlord brings an action for forfeiture of a
lease for breach of covenant, the lease comes to. an end
when the writ is served and not when it is issued. The
present practice of claiming rent up to the date of issue
of the writ and mesne profits thereafter is wrong and
should not be followed.
The Court, deciding for the first time a point on
which there were conflicting statements in the authori
ties so held in dismissing an appeal by defendant lessees
from the decison of Judge Herbert at Westminster County
Court last July in favour of landlords of a house and shop
in Rusholme, Manchester, that the lessee company were
liable to pay the landlords £200 rent for the quarter ended
June 24, 1968, on forfeiture of the lease for breach of
contract.
Canas Property Co. Ltd. v. I.T.L. Television Services
Ltd. C. of A. 13/4/40.
His Lordship refused
to make
a declaration
that
restrictive covenants limiting the number of houses that
could be erected on land part of which is now owned by
Birmingham Corporation, contained in a conveyance of
February 27, 1871, and other conveyances, were not
enforceable. The 1871 conveyance was between Ann and
Mary Dolphin of the one part and Edward Mountford
Coleman of the other.
His Lordship, in a reserved jurl^ment, dismissed a
summons
by Birmingham Corporation
against Mr.
Boden
and
three
others
representing
numerous
persons who, being owners of parts of the Selly Hill
Estate, claimed to be entitled to enforce the covenants
against the Corporation.
Birmingham Corporation v. Boden and others. Ch. Div.
25/3/70.
Where a landlord is entitled to enforce a lease for his
tenant's breach of covenant, he does not waive his right
of reentry simply by granting a reversionary lease to a
third party " subject to and with
the benefit of" the
tenant's lease, for an act by the landlord which is not
communicated to the tenant or can have no impact on
him cannot constitute a waiver. An assignee of the
reversion can sue and reenter for rent in arrear at the
date of the assignment even though the right of reentry
arose before the assignment.
London and Country (A.D.) Ltd. v. Wilfrid Sportsman
and Another.
Master and Servant
Where employers terminated a four-year apprentice
ship agreement without justification, the apprentice was
entitled to damages for short-term loss of earnings for
the remainder of his term and also for long-term loss of
future prospects of a better job and higher status in the
labour market attaching to a person who has served his
apprenticeship.
Durk v. George Waller—C.A.—29/4/70.
Negligence
New Trial Ordered on Damages issue.
An infant under 2 years of age received severe head
injuries, and as a result, at the age of three, he developed
staring attacks which is a form of epilepsy. Henchy J.
having heard the evidence of neuro-surgeons, told the
jury that it was open to them to find that the infant
plaintiff would develop major epilepsy, and consequently
the jury assessed damages at £13,000. The Supreme
Court (O'Dalaigh C. J., Walsh and McLoughlin J. J.)
having reviewed the evidence held that Henchy J. had
overstated the effect of the neuro-surgeon's evidence, and
ordered a new trial on the question of damages.
Per O'Dalaigh C. J.—In cases such as this, where there
is an issue of possibility or probability of some disability
or il'ness arising in the future, the damages awarded
should be commensurate with, and proportionate to. the
degree of possibility or probability as the case may be.
Dunlop v. Kenny—unreported—29th July 1969.
His Lordship held that building and civil engineering
contractors who damaged an electricity cable and so cut
off power to a factory some distance away could be sued
in negligence by the owners of the factory for damages
for loss of production and damage to the plant. He was
giving judgmen
on a preliminary point of law in an
action by the plaintiffs, manufacturers of typewriters, of
Birmingham, against the contractors
S.C.M. (United Kingdom) Ltd. v.' W. J. Whittall and
Son Ltd. Q.B.D. 16/3/70.
The Court of Appeal (Lord Justice Davies, Lord .Justice
Winn and Sir Frederic Sellers) gave leave to the plaintiff
Mrs.
Sheila Albert,
to
appeal
to
the House
of
Lords against their decision, affirming Mr. Justice Willis,
135