76 / 266
No, said Upjohn J. The damages should include
all damages relating to breach of contract, and
extended to all damage which would naturally be
expected to flow from the solicitor’s breach o f duty.
The facts were as follows :—In 1941, M. a minor,
became tenant-in-tail in possession of the settled
property. On September 18th, 1944, M. attained
his majority, and was then serving overseas with the
Royal A ir Force. In December, 1944, M’s mother,
as agent for M. consulted solicitors, who, being
under a misapprehension that M. was absolutely
entitled, advised that no step be taken to transfer
the settled property to M. until he returned to
England, instead of advising M. to execute a dis
entailing deed. In May, 1945, M. was killed in
action. He was a bachelor, and died intestate,
without having disentailed the setded property,
which consequendy passed to an uncle of M.
M’s mother, as his personal representative, claimed
damages from the solicitors for negligence and
breach o f contract. The Court found as a fact that
the solicitors were grossly negligent and that the
breach of contract was established. In the cir
cumstances, the failure to give proper advice might
be expected to result in the loss to M’s estate o f the
settled property.
Damages were consequendy
assessed at
£6,
500. (Otter
v.
Church Adams
Tathan & Co. [1953] 1. All E .R . 168.)
If, under Order
65,
Rule
65 (44)
o f the Supreme
Court Rules (Ireland),
1905
(corresponding to the
relevant English rule), special fe e s may be allowed to
counself o r the
“
total time occupied by the trial
”
exceed
ing
5
hours, can the Taxing Master, in computing this
time allow the time spent by counsel intendewing a Judge
in Chambers, or other counsel in the building?
Yes, said Vaisey J. I f such time is spent during
normal court hours to discuss a possible compromise
or setdement, the time spent by counsel on such
discussion may be allowed even if they are not in
open Court at the time.
Per Vaisey J. :—“ So long as the Judge is in open
Court, or in his private room, with the Registrar
in attendance in Court awaiting his return, and no
other case is being tried, or is receiving the attention
o f the Judge, the whole o f the time in ordinary
Court hours may be said to be occupied by the trial,
even if some part of that time is not being employed
for the purposes of argument, or the hearing of
evidence.” (Lawson
v.
Tiger—(1953) I. All E.R.
—698).
N
o t e
:
The wording o f the Irish Order 65,
Rule 65 (44) is wider than the corresponding
English rule, because it give's the Taxing Master
discretion to allow reasonable refreshers to Counsel
in cases where they might have been heretofore
allowed.
RECENT LEGAL LITERATURE
Irish Law Times and Solicitor’s Journal
J
anuary
3RD
—
The Intent in Larceny, Pt. I
;
January 10—The Intent in Larceny, Part I I ; January
17—The Fencing o f Machinery, Aiding and abetting;
January 24—The Adoption Act, 1952, Part I ;
January 3 1—-The Adoption Act, 1952, Part I I ;
Mortgagee suing for possession; February 14—
Legislation in Eire, 19 51, Pt I I ; February 2 1—
Seduction at Common Law. February 28—Master
and Servant—Duty to take reasonable care for the
Workmen’s safety. Injuries to Schoolchildren (Rich
v.
L.C.C.)
The Law Times
(England).
J
anuary
?.
nd
—
Pollution o f Rivers (“ Pride of
Derby
v.
British Celanese ” ); January 9—Charitable
Trusts : Nathan Committee’s Report; January 16— ,
Charitable Trusts : Committee’s Recommendations ;
January 23—The Bankruptcy Rules, 1952 ; January
20—Modification o f Trusts—I ;
February 6—
Modification o f Trusts—II. Solicitor’s Remuneration
Orders, 1953. Damage by Animals—Goddard
Report;
February 20—Coronation Seat Cases.
Searches on behalf o f Mortgagees ; February 27—
Legal Aid, Second Report. Forgery by Co-
Trustees (“ Brewer
v.
Westminster Bank ” ).
The Modern Laiv Review—January
A New Equitable Interest in Land (Cheshire).
The Shock Cases and Area o f Risk (Goodhart).
In consistencies and injustices in the Law o f Husband
and Wife' (Kahn-Freund). When is a Repeal not a
Repeal (Murray).
Solicitors’ Journal
(England).
D
ecember
13TH—
Company Law,
Charitable
Objects. Locality Cases in the Law o f Charity.
Gifts to Hospitals. Unauthorised U ser: Trustees in
Trouble. Music and Charity. The Care o f Children.
January 3—Control o f Tenancy :
The “ Single
Structure ” Test. January 17—Nathan Committee :
The Definition o f “ Charity .” Controlled Tenant
becoming Licensee (“ Murray Bull
v.
Murray ” ).
7.4