557 / 736
There were no special reasons for not disquali
fying a man driving with an excessive proportion
of alcohol in his blood when going after midnight
to help his business partner who was stranded
with his aged and ailing mother in a remote part
of the country in a car which had run out of
petrol.
Their Lordships so held when dismissing an
application by George Baines, aged
thirty-two,
mastic contractor, of Rishton, for leave to appeal
against disqualification. He was fined £25 and
disqualified for twelve months on his conviction
at Blackburn Quarter Sessions (assistant recorder :
Mr. P. J. Corcoran) of contravening Section 1
(1)
of the Road Safety Act, 1967.
[Regina v Baines; Court of Appeal;
The Times,
29 July 1970.]
ESTATE AGENTS
Mr. Justice Cooke, in a reserved judgment in
the Queen's Bench Division, said that when a
person employs estate agents to act for him for
acquiring property, the same principle over pay
ment of commission applies as when an agent is
employed to dispose of property. The rights and
liabilities of the parties depend on the exact terms
of the contract and their construction, as stated
in Luxor (Eastbourne) Ltd. v Cooper (1941, A.C.
108, 124).
[Gerrard Smith & Co. v Villiero; Q.B.D.;
The
Times,
7 July 1970.]
EVIDENCE
The effect of the Civil Evidence Act, 1968,
making a conviction admissible in evidence in
subsequent civil proceedings is to shift the legal
burden of proof on to the person convicted to
show in the civil proceedings that he did not do
the acts of which he was convicted. It is not the
function of the judge in the civil action to con
sider what view he might have taken had he sat
either as
juryman or
judge
in
the criminal
proceedings.
[Stupple v Royal Insurance Co. Ltd.; Court of
Appeal (1970) 3 WLR 217.]
A priest has no privilege in law which enables
him to refuse to give evidence of communications
between himself and a spouse made at a time
when he was acting as a marriage conciliator.
Father Handley, of
the Catholic Marriage
Advisory Council, unsuccessfully applied to the
101
Court to set aside a
subpoena ad testificandum
served on him by Mr. Cyril Pais, of Bowood Rd.,
S.W., the petitioner in a nullity suit on the ground
of the incapacity of the wife, Mrs. Julina Pais, to
consummate the marriage.
[Pais v Pais; Probate Divorce and Admiralty
Division; 28 April 1970; but cf. decision of Gavan
Duffy P., 1945, I.R. 515—Cook v Carroll.]
FAMILY
Their Lordships said that a judge was wrong in
his view that if a husband hit his wife over the
head with a milk bottle it was cruelty, but that it
was not cruelty if the wife did the same to the
husband.
[Robinson v Robinson; Court of Appeal;
The
Times,
23 June 1970.]
FIRE DAMAGE
The Greater London Council were held liable
for fire damage caused to buildings, transport and
stock of furniture manufacturers when sparks flew
from a waste material fire lit nearby by a demo
lition contractor who was removing prefabricated
temporary bungalows from council land under
contract with the Ministry of Public Buildings and
Works.
[H. and N. Emanuel Ltd. v Greater London
Council and another; Q.B.D.
(James J.);
The
Times,
21 July 1970.]
LANDLORD AND TENANT
Their Lordships held that Section 11 of the
Rent Act, 1968, contemplates that any application
for the suspension of the execution of an order for
possession shall be made by the statutory tenant
and no one else.
They dismissed an appeal by Mrs. Dunn, who
is
living apart from her husband, Mr. Stanley
Dunn, against
the dismissal by Deputy Judge
Stucley at Watford County Court of her appli
cation under Section 11 for the suspension of an
order for possession
in respect of a protected
dwelling house, Highfield, Pinner. The possession
order had been made against Mr. Dunn at the
suit of the landlord, Mr. Penn, the respondent.
[Penn v Dunn; (1970) 1 A.E.R. 858 C.A.]
NEGLIGENCE
Tesco Supermarkets Ltd. succeeded in an appli
cation for leave to appeal to the House of Lords