88 / 244
INQUIRIES
UNDER
THE
LABOURERS’ ACTS—COSTS
Inspectors appointed by the Local Government
Department who hold inquiries relating to the
compulsory acquisition of land for labourers plots
have been accustomed to order payment of the
costs of successful objectors limited to 10/6 in respect
o f each plot. This Society regards this payment as
inadequate, and representations were made some
years ago to the Department pointing out that by
virtue of Section 91 o f the Local Government Act,
1946, the power to award costs was not limited to
the sum of 10/6. The Society has been informed
that in several cases recently, the inspector has
directed a contribution of three guineas towards the
objector’s costs to be paid by the local authority.
As this may not be generally known, it is thought
desirable to draw the attention o f the profession
to the matter so that the precedent established may
be followed in other cases. In the particular case
concerned, the objections were successful, but the
power o f the Minister to order payment in such
cases seems to exist equally where the objection
is unsuccessful.
PROFESSIONAL ITEMS
Solicitors lien over monies lodged to clients
account
A solicitor whose costs have not been paid has
two remedies open to him in addition to the usual
remedy of suing for the debt. One is the general
retaining lien over property of the client in his
possession until the costs due have been paid. This
is a common law right which is independent of
statute. The other is the statutory right under section
3 of the Legal Practitioners (Ireland) Act, 1876,
enabling the solicitor to apply to the Court for an
order charging his costs in an action on property
which has been recovered through his exertions
.in such proceedings. In Loescher
v.
Dean (1950, 2
All E.R. 124), the plaintiff obtained a decree for
specific performance of a contract for the sale of
certain property subject to payment by him to the
defendant of a sum of £268 4s. 9c!. The plaintiff
was awarded the costs of the action. On April
17th the sum of £268 4s. 9d., mentioned in the
Order, was paid to the defendant’s solicitors in
exchange for a conveyance of the property to the
plaintiff. On the same day, the plaintiff successfully
garnished all debts due from the defendant’s solicitor
to the defendant in respect of costs which had been
taxed at £268 16s. jd. On April 19th after service
of the garnishee order upon them, the defendant s
solicitors applied for a charging order in respect of
their own costs under the Solicitors Act, 1932,
Section 59 which is similar in terms to Section 3 of
the Legal Practitioners (Ireland) Act, 1876.
The
sum of £268 4s. 9d. had been lodged by the
defendant’ s solicitors, as they were bound to do,
in the client account opened by them. They also
claimed a retaining lien in respect o f money in the
client account belonging to the defendant. The re
taining lien would give them merely a passive right to
retain the money until their costs had been paid.
It was submitted by the plaintiff that the lien could
not exist in respect of trust monies in the client
account. Harmon, J., said that he could see no
reason why a solicitor, if he had money in his
possession, had not an ordinary lien over it the
fact that he put it in a client account would not
mean that it was any the less his account, although
it was earmarked in that way, and it seemed that
the client could not come and ask for the handing
over of the money. It would be an answer to say,
“ You have not paid my bill and I shall not pay you
your money until you have.
Consequently, the
money not being money which the debtor could
obtain from the solicitor without paying his bill,
the creditor’s rights under the garnishee order are
subject to the solicitors’ retaining lien, and the
garnishee order against it must be discharged to
the extent of the solicitors’ right to their lien. The
Court also held, although it was not necessary to
decide the point, that the sum of £268 4s. 9d. which
was payable under the Order of the Court as a con
dition precedent to the order for specific performance
by the defendant was not property recovered or
preserved through the instrumentality o f the
defendant’s solicitor. Accordingly, there was no
right to a charge thereon for the defendant’s
solicitors’ costs, and the solicitor was limited to
the passive remedy of his retaining lien over the
money in the client bank account in his name.
Sale by trustees—better offer received
In Buttle & Anor.
v.
Saunders & Anor. (66
T .L.R . 1026), litigation arose out of a situation
which occurs sometimes in a solicitor s practice.
The defendants were the trustees of certain premises
held on statutory trusts for sale under the English
Law of Property Act, 1925. The plaintiffs were some
o f the beneficiaries interested under the trust, and
they sought an injunction to prevent the trustees
from
spiling
the property for the sum of £6,142.
The sum of £6,000 had been offered by a Mrs.
Simpson for the trustees’ interest in the property. A
draft contract had been prepared and submitted to
Mrs. Simpson’ s solicitors who agreed to all terms in