145 / 328
is no suggestion that Mr. Bennett doubted his
client's word or took pains to avoid discovery of a
suspected truth." The learned judge had said earlier
on in his judgment that it was obvious that the client
only came to his solicitor and disclosed debts that
were due when the creditors were pressing him so
hard that he needed his solicitor's assistance to keep
them at bay. (In re Dalton (a bankrupt),
ex parte
Herrington and Carmichael
v.
The Trustee 1962.
3,
Weekly Law Reports,
page 140.)
NOTE
In this country the English Act of 1914 does not
apply and the Act of Bankruptcy which would
probably correspond is that set out in section 21
of the Bankruptcy (Ireland) Amendment Act, 1872,
as follows:
" That execution issued against the debtor on
any legal process for the purpose of obtaining
payment of not less than
£2.0
has in the case of
a trader been levied by seizure and sale of his
goods ".
The words " and sale " should be noted.
Section 46, referred to above (providing for
bona
fide
payments or payments made in the ordinary
course of business and without notice of the Bank
ruptcy petition) has no counterpart in this country.
further medical evidence obtained by tribunal after bearing
and before decision—functions of assessor.
The applicant, a hospital porter, was required in
the course ofhis employment to be inoculated against
poliomyelitis. Almost immediately after an inocula
tion he developed rheumatism, which was later
diagnosed as rheumatoid arthritis. In a claim made
under the National Insurance (Industrial Injuries)
Acts, 1946 to 1960, he alleged that this incapacity-
was a personal injury which he had suffered by
accident arising out of and in the course of his
employment. The local appeal tribunal decided that
he had made out a case. The insurance officer
appealed, and the deputy industrial injuries commis
sioner acceded to a request for an oral hearing, in
the course of which medical evidence was given and
the question was raised whether the applicant's
inoculation could have caused or contributed to his
rheumatoid arthritis. The deputy commissioner did
not at the hearing have the assistance of an assessor
under reg. 22 (6) of the National Insurance (Industrial
Injuries) (Determination of Claims and Questions)
Regulations, 1948, but after the hearing and before
giving his decision, he sought the assistance of a
specialist in rheumatology, to whom all the case
papers were submitted and to whom the deputy
commssioncr afterwards read bis own notes of the j
oral evidence. In his decision, the deputy commis
sioner recorded the advice which he had received
from the specialist, which was, in effect, that, on the
balance of probabilities, the applicant's rheumatoid
arthritis was not caused or aggravated by his
inoculation, and stated that he found against the
applicant in view of this advice. No notice of the
advice received was given to the parties, nor were
they given an opportunity of challenging or com
menting on it. On the application for certiorari to
quash the decision of the deputy commissioner,
Held :
certiorari would be granted, because—
(i) as a quasi-judicial tribunal deciding a case
inter partes
after an oral hearing, the deputy commis
sioner was not entitled to continue privately to
obtain evidence between the end of the oral hearing
and his decision, without informing the parties of
the advice or information so obtained, so as to give
them an opportunity of commenting on it.
(ii) the function of a medical assessor under
reg. 22 (6) of the Regulations of 1948, was confined
to advising
the commissioner on
the medical
evidence, and if anything more were required the
proper course was to proceed under reg. 26 (i) ;
in the present case certain passages of the advice
received exceeded the functions of an assessor under
reg. 22 (6) with the consequence that, if the tribunal
were to rely on it, information of the advice should
have been given to the parties and opportunity to.
call evidence or make submissions thereon.
(R.
v.
Deputy Industrial Injuries Commissioner,
ex parte
Jones, 1962, 2,
All England Reports,
page 430.)
Notary Public—application for appointment by a stock
broker.
OnJuly 23rd, the Chief Justice gave judgment in an
application by a stockbroker for appointment as a
notary public. The application was opposed by the
Faculty of Notaries Public and by the Incorporated
Law Society.
The Chief Justice in granting .the-
application said that he agreed with the recent trend
of decisions in respect of such applications, which
was to prefer applicants from the solicitors' pro
fession. However, in this particular case he would
have to have regard to the fact that a vacancy had
occurred and no application for appointment from a
solicitor had been forthcoming. His Lordship was
satisfied that the public interest would be served
by the granting of the application on condition that
the applicant should undertake not to do any
conveyancing or other legal work which was not
appropriate to his profession as a stockbroker. The
applicant was present in court and gave the required
undertaking.