102 / 266
(b)
A person requires under section 12 of
the Stamp Act, 1891, the Revenue Com
missioners to express their opinion with
reference to the instrument, and
(
c
) it is shown to the satisfaction o f the
Revenue Commissioners that the person
who became entitled to the entire bene
ficial interest in the lessee’s interest under
the instrument (or, where more than one
person became entitled to a beneficial
interest therein, each o f them) was, at
the date o f the execution o f the instrument,
an Irish citizen,
the instrument shall be deemed to have contained
any such statements as are referred to in the 1949
section that could properly have been contained
therein, and to have been chargeable with duty
accordingly, whether or not it has previously been
stamped with a particular. stamp denoting that it
is duly stamped.
(4)
In any such case as is referred to in
subsection
(2) or
subsection
(3) o f this
section, the Revenue Commissioners may
repay the difference between the amount of
duty actually charged on the instrument and
the amount deemed to be chargeable thereon
by virtue o f this section, provided that the
application for repayment is made within
two years after the date o f the passing o f this
Act or the date o f the instrument (which
ever date is the later).
5. The reference in paragraph
(a)
o f subsection
(1) o f section 19 of the Finance Act, 1951 (No. 15
of 1951), to the enactments in force immediately
before the passing o f that Act shall be construed
as including a reference to the foregoing subsections
of this section.
EXAMINATION RESULTS
At the Intermediate Examination for apprentices
to solicitors held on the 18 th and 19th days of May
the following passed the examination.
Passed with Merit
1. Anthony Gerard Moylan; 2. Thomas Crowley;
3. William A. P. O’ Connor; 4. Arthur Joseph
O’Leary;
5. Iseult Clare Kennedy; 6. Patrick
Joseph Carolan; 7. Brenda Halpin; 8. Brian J.
O’Connor,
Passed
Ann M. Ad Burke, John Paschal Dillon, Matthew
14
P. Drum, James F. Kenny, Anthony F. McCormack,
Timothy Bernard McEniry, Sean F. Mac Giollarnath,
George V . Maloney, James J. O’ Sullivan.
Thirty candidates entered; 17 passed.
The remaining candidates are postponed.
The Centenary Prize was awarded to Anthony
Gerard Moylan.
By ORDER
E
ric
A.
P
lunkett
,
Secretary.
Solicitors’ Buildings,
Four Courts,
Dublin.
n th June 1953.
SOLICITOR AND CLIENT.
PRIVILEGE CLAIM UPHELD
M
r
. John Budd, solicitor defending Mr. and Mrs.
A. E. Merrifield, was called upon to give evidence
on Crown subpoenas at Blackpool yesterday and
“ to produce certain objects.” Mr Budd claimed
privilege between solicitor and client, and said he
would not produce the objects. The Magistrate
(Mr. R. Robert Derbyshire) upheld Mr. Budd’s
submission that the objects were subjects of privilege
as between solicitor and client.
In the dock were Louisa Merrifield, aged 46,
and her husband Alfred Edward Merrifield, aged 70,
both o f Devonshire Road, Blackpool, who were
remanded in custody until next Wednesday charged
with the murder at Blackpool on April 14 o f Sarah
Ann Ricketts, aged 79, a widow to whom they acted
as housekeepers.
Mr. Edward C. Jones, for the Director o f Public
Prosecutions, said that the prosecution had served
subpoenas on the defending solicitor, Mr. Budd,
and the prosecution were now going to call him as
a witness and to ask him to produce certain docu
ments. A deposition o f his evidence would be
taken, and at a certain stage he might claim privilege
as between solicitor and client as to whether or not
he should produce the objects, and that would be
a matter for the court to decide.
Mr. Budd then entered the witness box, and in
reply to Mr. Jones said that he had been served with
three subpoenas issued by the Crown. While he
had been representing the accused persons a certain
object or objects came into his possession on May
4th. He received them from Mr. Merrifield.
They were handed to him at an interview at which
Mr. Merrifield sought professional advice. The
objects were still in his possession and had been