The Gazette 1952-1955

157 / 266

negotiations and therefore fell within the general
principle. (Rabin v. Mendoza & Co., 1954, 1. W.L.R.
271)- \
I f a solicitor practising in Wales claims by summary
summons f o r professional services and moneys expended on
behalf o f a litigant at the request o f the defendant, a
solicitor practising in Ireland, must the summons allege
that a signed copy o f a bill o f costs had been served on the
defendant as required by the Solicitors' Acts.
No, said Dixon J. The endorsement was suffic­
iently explicit to support the cause o f action alleged.
(Wilson v. Casey, 86 1. L.T .R . 34).
Is there a validplea ofprivilege by the Home Office, relat­
ing to the police and medical reports where anther prisoner
had assat. Ited plaintijf i 1 h i prison cell, in an action f o r
injuries brought by the plaintiff against the Home Office
f o r negligent supervision by their servants ?
Yes, said the Court o f Appeal (Singleton, Jenkins
and Morris, L .JJ) affirming Devlin J., but it should
be exercised with great care. While it is essential
that responsible Government Departments should
be entitled to claim privilege for documents the
disclosure o f which would be against the public
interest, and that the decision o f the responsible
Minister in respect o f any particular document should
be final, it is desirable in the interests o f justice
that documents coming within the ambit o f privilege
should be most carefully scrutinized and that the
person entrusted with that task should, in regard
to each document, consider whether the harm done
to the public interest by disclosure is sufficient to
outweigh the hampering or impeding o f a plaintiff’s
case if that evidence is not made available.
Per Singleton L .J. : “ It seems to me that it is
desirable in a case such as this that there should be
disclosure and production of documents which
cannot harm the public interest, and that each
individual document should be examined before a
claim o f privilege is made. The desire o f every
Court above all things is that every litigant should
have a fair chance and appear to have a fair chance.
The danger is the wide claim o f privilege without
consideration o f individual documents.”
Per Jenkins L .J. “ Where there is a large number
o f relevant documents within the ambit o f privilege
which may become really material as the case
develops, there should be someone on the spot
readily available—whether counsel, solicitor, or a
civil servant—invested with authority to consider
questions o f privilege which may arise in the course
of the case, and in his discretion to waive such
claim. The .question should 'be disposed of in the
course o f delay without the" delay imposed by
reference back to the Minister.”
Per Morris L .J. “ It seems too, that when con­
sidering the public interest, and what might be
injurious to it, it is to be remembered that one
facet o f the public interest is that justice should
be done, and should be seen to be done.” (Ellis v.
Home Office, (1953) 3. W.L.R. 105).
LIBRARY ACQUISITIONS
Beattie—Revenue Law, 1953 ; Belfast and Northern
Ireland Directory, 1953 ; Brown—Law o f Contract,
1 953 ; Catholic Directory, 1953 ; Cambridge University
Calendar, 1950/51 ; Cambridge University—Students
Handbook, 1950/51 ; Cambridge University—Supplement
to Law School, 1953/54; Current Law Consolidation,
1947/51 ; Current Law Monthly —from January 1953 ;
Current Law Year-Book, 1 95a; Currie —■Consequential
Fire loss in the United Kingdom and Fire, 1 952;
Denning—The Changing Law, 1953 ; Dew—Divorce
Law and Practice, 1953 ; Directory o f Directors, 1952
(Donation) ; Dobson —-The Central Criminal Court;
Dublin University Calendar, 1952/53 ; Fdinburgh Uni­
versity Calendar, 1953/54; English and Empire Digest,
3rd Cumulative Supplement, 1953 ; Evershed Report
on Practice and Procedure o f Supreme Court, 1953;
Eversley—Law o f Domestic Relations, 6th edition,
1952 ; Faraday—Law o f Rating, 5th edition, 1951 ;
Fitzgerald —The Work o f the Lands Tribunal, 1953 ;
Fletcher—Landlord and Tenant, 1953 ; Gower—Law
o f Contract, 1953 ; Griffith—Law o f Tort, 1953 ;
Griffith and Street, Principles o f Administrative Law,
1952 ; Harris—Hints on Advocacy,! 5th edition, 1920
(donation); Hayes and Jarman—Concise Forms o f
Wills, 1 8th edition, 1952; Howe—Work o f Criminal
Investigation Dept., 1 952; Incorporated Law Society
Calendar, 1953 and 1954; Incorporated Law Society,
Record o f the Centenary o f the Charter, 1953 ; Informa­
tion Please Almanac, 1953 (Donation); International
Law List, 1953 and 1954; International Yearbook
and Statemen’s Who's Who, 1953 ; Irish Catholic
Directory, 1 953; Jowitt—Office o f Lord Chancellor,
1933 ; Kelly—Conveyancing Draftsman, 9th edition,
1950 ; Kerr—Law o f Fraud and Mistake, 7th edition,
1952 ; Kerr—Law o f Receivers, 12th edition, 1952 ;
Kime—International Law Directory, 1951 (Donation) ;
Law List, 1953 ; London Post Office Directory, 1955 ;
London University Calendar, 1952/53 ; Lund—Practice
and Etiquette o f the Bar affecting solicitors, 1952;
Mattindale Hubbell—Law Directory, 3 vols., 1952
(Donation) ; Mathew—The Department o f the Director
o f Public Prosecutions, 1953 ; May—Law o f Fraudulent
and Voluntary Conveyances, 3rd edition, 1908 (Dona­
tion).; Northern Ireland Statutes, 1953 ; Odgers—
Construction o f Deeds and Statutes, 3rd edition, 1952;
Oke—Treatise on Summary Convictions, 1850 (Dona­
tion); Oxford University Calendar, 1953 ; Phillips—