509 / 736
scene of
the murder, of which
the
jury had seen
photographs as it was then, had changed considerably
since October last. This could well be a material point
in the case, they said.
The second point was that they (the three defence
counsel)
had
been
discussing
the
case
while
walking at the side of the courthouse at lunch time.
They noticed a group of people in a downstairs room
and these could have been the jury. The window was
open and their conversation might have been overheard.
The judge said the proper course for him was to
discharge this jury, and he did so on the grounds that
the bus had gone past the material point on a number
of days. At the moment he was saying nothing about
the position with regard to the jury room, except that,
in future trials, the jury might be kept in an upstairs
room. He also suggested that jury keepers should be
placed outside
so
that nobody would pass
in
the
vicinity.
The judge went on to say he did not think it would
be fair to the accused to swear in another jury at this
sitting of the Commission. He referred to the publicity
the trial had been given—some evidence given in the
abence of the jury had been published—and said
it
would be in
the minds of any juror sworn from the
jury panel.
He adjourned the trial until the autumn sitting of the
City Commission in Belfast, and refused applications
for bail on behalf of the three accused. "It is a very
serious charge, and J do not consider it a case in which
bail could be granted," he said. But he agreed the
accused men could see their relatives.
When
the
jury returned,
the
judge
told
them of
the situation. There was a possibility of a miscarriage
of justice and a wrongful impression being created in
the minds of the jury. He regretted the time, trouble
and work that had been wasted as a result of dis
continuing the trial. He discharged the jury from any
further service for ten years.
—Irish Independent, ll/6/'70
CURRENT LAW DIGEST
INCLUDING
IRISH
CASES
BANKRUPTCY
Order of payment of
client's moneys
in bankrupt
solicitor accounts
A solicitor who transferred his client's account from
one Dublin branch of a bank *•'
--»1-~- between July
and October 1958. had lodged £2,633 odd to the credit
of the client's account: at the same time, he withdrew
some sums from the client's account not authorised bv
the Solicitors Accounts Regulations 1955, and in October
1958
lodged £863 of his own money in
the client's
account. Under the Solicitors' Act 1954,
the
Incor
porated Law Society,
if satisfied
that a solicitor
is
dishonest, may applv to the High Court for an order
directing that a specified bank shall not, without leave,
make pavment out of a banking account kept in such
bank in
the name of a solicitor or of a
firm: such
an order was made in this matter on 17th October 1958,
the solicitor was adjudicated a bankrupt. There was
then £1 396 outstanding in client's account and claims
amountnig to £2.495 have been admitted in the Bank
ruptcy. The principle however is that, if
the amount
lodged in repect of a client exceeds the
amount found
due
in
the bankruptcy, under Section
68
of
the
Solititors Act 1954, the balance must be used to satisfy
the claims of all other clients whose moneys have been
lodged to the exclusion of a client who has contributed
a large um of monev. The official assignee was duly
appointed a trustee of the client account, and has now
asked for a decision on two questions :—
1.
Whether the sum of £1,396 to credit in client's
account belongs fa) to the client's creditors whose
mnoeys were most recently lodged in the account
or
(b)
to all the client creditors in rationable
proportions.
2. Whether the sum of £863, which the solicitor had
lodged
in client's account separately
from his
own moneys, belongs (a)
to the client creditors
whose moneys were most recently lodged or (b)
to all the client creditors in rateable proportions.
The English case of "In Re A Solicitor" (1952) Ch.
decided
that when a solicitor becomes bankrupt
the
client's account is properly held
in
trust for another
person. Held, that, on the adjudication of a solicitor,
the Official Assignee does not get any valid claim to
the moneys standing to the credit of a client account,
until all the claims of the clients in respect of their
monies lodged have been satisfied.
( " ere is no corresponding leglislation in England to
Section 68 of the Solicitors Act 1954. As to the sum of
£863, it can only be inferred that the solicitor intended
this to be a replacement of part of the moneys which
he
u ad wrongfully withdrawn.
Held,
the sum standing
to
the credit of a client
should be
applied
in paying
the
claims
of
these
creditors whose moneys were most
recently
lodged
immediately prior to the bankruptcy. This applied to
the sum £1,396. As to the £863, it should be dealt with
on the basis as part of a general amount to the credit
of that account.
(In re A.B. a Bankrupt Solicitor — Kenny J. —
unreported — 8th December 1969
CONFLICT OF LAWS
Decisions in Arbitration Clause as to which law to apply
should prima facie be left
to
arbitrator
The House of Lords (Lord Reid, Morris, Wilberforce,
and Diplock and Viscount Dilhorne)
held
that the
presence of a clause providing for arbitration in London
in a contract with substantial foreign connexions which
'' •
to
state positively
the
intention of
the parties
to the proper law of the contract does not eive rise to
a conclusive presumption may be rebutted where, on
any challenge as to the proper law, it is shown that the
contract has
its closest connection with the
law of
another country.
Lord Wilberforce in so deciding regretted that in the
present case the foreign parties, after choosing English
arbitrators, should have been subjected <r>
litigation on
a preliminary point
in
three courts on
top of
the
arbitration, and expressed the vie'" *'--'
flie expertise
of City of London arbitrators suggested that decisions
as to the proper law of a contract should be left to
them, or if the court's view was required, the decision
of the commercial iudfe should end the matter.
Their Lordships allowed an interlocutory anneal by
55