65 / 736
plaintiff : but rejected by Supreme Court—Trade
Disputes Act not applicable—Appeal dismissed.
(10th April, 1967).
3.
Sterling Winthrop Group Ltd.
v. Farben-
Fabriken Bayer, A-G.
Appeal against interlocutory injunction of Kenny
J. restraining defendants until after full judgment
from distributing in Ireland any chemical pro
ducts, for medical use named "Bayer"—plaintiff?
contend that defendants goods if sold would lead
to confusion—defendants must not pass off their
goods as plaintiffs—plaintiffs do not claim their
product to be German—Supreme Court held most
people believe that plaintiffs goods are defendants'.
The plaintiff is primarily responsible for the con
fusion—Appeal allowed—Interlocutory injunction
discharged. (1st May, 1967).
4. /.
& L. S. Goodbody Ltd. v. Clyde Shipping
Company.
Order for leave to deliver interrogatories ten out
of twenty-five allowed by Murnaghan J.—appeal
to allow other fifteen—defendants contracted to
watch a cargo of jute in a dockside shed in Water-
ford—Murnaghan J. justified in allowing inter
rogatories 1, 3-6, 7-17, and 20. Appeal allowed by
Supreme Court holding that interrogatories at a
special pre-trial procedure should be encouraged.
(9th May, 1967).
5.
Mullan v. Doyle.
The plaintiff, a nurse in County Leitrim, a plain
tiff pillon passenger on motercycle which was in
collision with defendant's motorcar in Bundoran.
Proceedings instituted in February, 1963—notice
to serve motor-cyclist defendant granted in March,
1965, when other defendants denied liability—
motor-cyclist issued separate action against de
fendants claiming personal injury in May, 1965—
in December, 1965, upon an application by the
defendants for a summons for directions Mur
naghan J. ordered that the third party order be
set aside—
the Supreme Court allowed the appeal,
on the ground that multiplicity could be avoided
by joining the motor-cyclist as a third defendant,
and granted the summons for directions. (10th
May, 1967).
6.
Dolan v. Neligan.
Claim by plaintiff for £19,200 customs duty for
imported Baby Cham—duty charged under head
ing "Perry" plus duty on spirit content. It was
decided that duty was only payable for Perry—
plaintiff made overpayments to clear goods from
customs and subsequently claimed refund—Kenny
J., while holding that plaintiff could recover for a
mistake of law, also held that the plaintiff had
not availed of the statutory procedure under the
Customs Consolidation Act, 1876 and dismissed
the claim. The Supreme Court held, that in the
event of an overpayment, unless it were clearly
stated that the money lodged was a deposit under
the Customs Acts, it should not be deemed to be
so—the fact that the plaintiff paid the duty did
not automatically invoke Customs Acts procedure.
The customs have statuory power to repay any
monies overpaid in error—the statute is manda
tory and does not merely confer a discretion,
provided the claim is made within six years—
Appeal allowed and judgment entered for plain
tiff for full amount, (llth May, 1967).
7.
Corr v. Bradshaw.
The plaintiff-occupier of house in Dalkey claims
a full right of way for vehicles from rear of house
to Harbour Road,—Defendants contend right of
way limited to pedestrians—Kenny J. granted the
plaintiff full right of way with vehicles—Supreme
Court there was ample evidence to justify plain
tiff's contention, and that there was a common
user of the right of way—Appeal dismissed. (18th
July 1967).
8.
State (Coughlan) v. Minister for Justice.
Applicant detained in Mental Hospital in Dun-
drum—Murnaghan J. refused to make absolute
conditional order of habeas corpus— Applicant
appeared before District Justice Shaw in Septem
ber, 1965 on changes under Malicious Damages
Act, 1861 while applicant (aged nineteen) was
on
remand
in St. Patrick's
Institution. Two
doctors certify him to be insane, as he has always
been a mental defective—as a result, the Minis
ter made an order confining applicant to Grange-
gorman—a week
later
the Minister by order
transferred applicant to Dundrum—the charge is
adjourned generally—Medical Superintendent of
Grangegorman
had
recommended
discharge
July, 1965—Mother applies to have applicant re-
transferred to Grangegorman. Minister refuses—
conditional order obtained in February, 1967.
Applicant challenges constitutionality of section
13 of the Lunatic Asylums (Ireland) Act, 1875,
which provides that a warrant can be issued order
ing a detained person certified by two physicians
to be of unsound mind to be detained in an
asylum indefinitely until he becomes of sound
mind. The Supreme Court held that on a pre
liminary investigation the accused had important
rights—unlike
the omnipotent English Parlia
ment, there is a separation of legislative, of judi
cial and executive power in our Constitution—
the provisions of judicial and executive power in
57