245 / 324
November, in the Royal Hibernian Hotel, at 7.45
p.m., on " The problems of unnatural offences."
Full particulars as to membership, etc., may be
obtained from the Hon. Secretary Mr. M. J. Leech
4 Chancery Place, Dublin. Phone 76931
DUBLIN SOLICITORS'
BAR ASSOCIATION
A MEETING of the Council of the Association was
held on Wednesday, 3rd July, 1957.
The Subcommittee has had the benefit of an
interview with the County Registrar concerning the
performance of their duties by Civil Bill Officers,
and a recommendation has been made as to the
qualification and training of future candidates.
The Association's
form of precedent
letting
agreement has now been circulated to all members.
The Council hope that it will have as much success
as the Association's form of contract for sale.
The Council are now considering the possibility
of producing executor and trustee precedent forms.
The date for the annual general meeting of the
Association has been provisionally fixed for Wednes
day, 9th October, 1957. Notices will be issued in
due course.
The next meeting of the Council of the Association
was fixed for Wednesday, 25th September, 1957.
MAYO SOLICITORS
BAR ASSOCIATION
A SPECIAL General Meeting of the Association was
held in the Bar Room, Castlebar, on Wednesday,
3rd July, 1957.
A resolution congratulating Mr. Michael Moran,
T.D., on his appointment as Minister for the Gael-
tacht and wishing him every success was proposed
by Mr. Alfred V. G. Thornton, and seconded by
Mr. Patrick J. McEllin and passed with acclamation.
Mr. Patrick J. McEllin was co-opted a member
of the Committee in lieu of Mr. Michael Moran.
The fees under the Enforcement of Court Orders
Acts, 1926, as approved by Justices of Nos. 7, 8 and
9 Districts were adopted and ordered to be printed
and distributed amongst members.
The Dinner of the Association to be held in
Newport House Hotel has been fixed for Saturday,
19th October next, in honour of Mr. Scan Hannon,
Lay Commissioner of the Land Commission, and
Mr. Michael Moran,T.D.,Minister for the Gaeltacht.
All members are requested to become members
of the Solicitors' Benevolent Association. The
Honorary Secretary has sent a circular addressed to
each member urging such membership and offering
to forward any subscriptions given to him.
DECISIONS OF PROFESSIONAL
INTEREST
Justices who employ counsel to defend prerogative writs in
the High Court, instead of sending in affidavits under
the review of Justices Decisions Act,
1872,
have
to
pay the costs of the other side, if they lose the case.
The applicant moved for an order of mandamus
directing the licensing justices for the division of
Llanidloes, Montgomeryshire, to hear and deter
mine an application for the extension of licensing
hours.
The justices appeared by counsel to oppose the
motion. The Court having granted the order of
mandamus, counsel for the applicant asked for the
costs of the application. The Divisional Court
(Lord Goddard, L.C.J., Hilbery and Devlin J.J.)
granted this application.
Per Lord Goddard, C.J. : The justices have made
themselves parties
to
this application and
the
applicant is entitled to costs against them. The
justices were entitled, if they chose, to avail them
selves of the Review of Justices Decisions Act, 1872,
which allows them to file affidavits. They do not
then make themselves liable for costs, and they do
not have to pay any stamp duty on the affidavit.
If, however, they choose to appear here, they make
themselves parties to the lis and take the risk of
being ordered to pay costs, and are entitled to receive
costs if they succeed in defeating the application.
I have been trying to remind justices, not only in
court, but also in addresses that I have given to
them, of their rights under the Act of 1872. That
Act was passed for the very purpose of allowing
justices, against whom a motion for certiorari or
mandamus was made, to put in affidavits giving
their reasons for opposing the motion, so that the
court could decide the case on the affidavits, but
if justices will insist on instructing counsel and
coming before the court and arguing the case, they
are making themselves parties to a lis.
The legis
lature has given them this opportunity of putting
their views before the court without being liable for
costs. If they do not choose to take it, that is their
affair. The justices have come here, filed affidavit
after affidavit, and have had the benefit of counsel's
strenuous argument.
Counsel for Licensing Justices :—In my sub
mission it would be a departure from previous
practice
that costs should be awarded against
justices unless
they had acted capriciously or
oppressively. Orders which cover the indemnity of
justices have been commonly made.
Lord Goddard, C.J. :—Then why should .they
39