286 / 324
The Report disclosed a welcome increase of nearly
£100 in annual subscriptions, but otherwise the
receipts differed little from those of last year, the
Association's income being gross £2,352 35. ad.
and nett, available for relief, £2,038 8s. yd. The
sum of £2,153 IOS - 6d. was granted in relief, being
the second largest pay-out for relief in any one year
in the history of the Association, and the number of
applicants for relief was considerably up on last year.
The Chairman stressed the valuable work being
done by the Association and its
secretary Mr.
McCarron, and strongly appealed to the profession
for their support to our only professional charity.
The need for the Association was more than ever
apparent.
Mr. Carrigan, in seconding the adoption of the,
report, strongly endorsed Mr. O'Brien's appeal to
the profession. The Report was duly adopted.
The Chairman announced that Mr. Henry P.
Mayne wished to resign from the office of Vice-
Chairman. He paid tribute to the services rendered
by Mr. Mayne to the Association as one of its
oldest members. Mr. Dinnen B. Gilmore was
elected Vice-Chairman and agreed to continue in
the capacity of honorary Secretary.
BAR ASSOCIATIONS
County Galway Solicitors' Bar Association
THE following officers and Council were elected for
the year 1958 at the Annual General Meeting of the
above Association, held in January :—President,
James P. Glynn ; Vice-President, William B. Gavin;
Hon. Secretary, Scan F. MacGiollarnath; Hon.
Treasurer, William B. Alien. Council: Edward C.
Cooke, Christopher P. Crowley, Dominick H.
Keirns, Thomas A. O'Donoghue, Scan 0 hOrain,
Daniel G. Shields.
Dublin Solicitors' Bar Association
A Meeting of the Council was held on Wednesday,
5th February, 1958.
The Meeting learned with great regret of the
recent death of Mr. Cecil Vanston, who had been
a president of the Association, and at the time of
his death was a member of the Council, and of the
Circuit and District Court and Hire Purchase Rules
Sub-committees.
The Council
tendered
their,
deepest sympathy to Mr. Vanston's widow.
The Council observed a great improvement in the
speed with which Grants of Probate and Adminis
tration are now issued, and acknowledged the success
tul efforts of the Probate Offber in this connection.
The President reported
that he and the Vice-
President had attended a very enjoyable function
as guests of the Southern Law Association.
Progress was reported on various other matters
and the next meeting was fixed for Wednesday,
5th March, 1958.
DECISIONS OF PROFESSIONAL
INTEREST
Umpire's discretion in award of costs upheld.
Mr. Justice Diplock dismissed a motion by buyers.
Heaven and Kesterton Ltd., to set aside an award,
by an umpire, Mr. Norman A. G. Davies, in which
he awarded the buyers £73 but ordered them to
pay the total costs of the arbitration amounting to
£179 los.
By a contract dated March 8, 1957,
the buyers
ordered from the sellers various quantities and de
scriptions of timber. When the goods were de
livered a claim was made by the buyers relating
to defects in quality in a number of the sizes of
wood, which was quantified at some £450. There
was also a claim to reject quantities of two particular
sizes for failure to comply with contract specifica
tions, and that part of the claim amounted to some
£573. Arbitrators were appointed,
and having
failed to reach agreement they appointed Mr. Davies
as umpire.
It was alleged that the umpire had misconducted
himself in that, in dealing with the costs of the refer
ence, he did not exercise his. discretion in a proper
judicial manner.
Mr. Justice Diplock said that he had no doubt
that an arbitrator in an arbitration of the present
kind had power to deprive a successful claimant of
his costs, and indeed to order him to pay the other
side's costs in appropriate circumstances, and the
mere fact that on the face of the award the buyers
had succeeded in the sum of £73 and yet had been
ordered to pay the costs would be no ground for
setting aside the award.
It was clear from the authorities cited to the
Court first, that a court had jurisdiction where it
appeared on the material before it that an arbitrator
had exercised his discretion in a non-judicial manner,
to set aside an order as to costs ;
secondly, that it
mattered not whether the material on which the
Court came to the decision appeared on the tace of
the award or from affidavits. While therefore it
might be that, had the umpire not put in an affidavit
and not given his reasons the buyers would not
have been able to urge that the order for costs
should be set aside, as the umpire had given his
reasons his Lordship was entitled to look at those
reasons and to ascertain whether he had exercised
his discretion judicially or not.
The umpire stated in his affidavit that in coming
ro his decision on costs he had regard to all the facts
and circumstances of the case including
(a)
that he
79