![Show Menu](styles/mobile-menu.png)
![Page Background](./../common/page-substrates/page0256.jpg)
Per Upjohn, L.J. :
In general, no doubt, a
tribunal having judicial functions to perform should
deliberate in public. But there may be good reasons,
either in particular cases or indeed in particular
classes of cases, where justice demands that the
hearing should be in private.
The High Court
sometimes hears cases in private, and examples
have been given by both my Lords, which I need
not repeat.
In this case one can well understand
the reason that may have actuated those responsible
for framing r. 21 :
justice to the solicitor against
whom a complaint is made. One can well understand
how serious it might be if a complaint had to be
deliberated in public and then a period necessarily
elapses while the tribunal has to put its findings into
writing.
In my judgement, this tribunal is entitled to the
benefit of the rule applicable to courts of law and may
claim absolute privilege.
(Addis
v.
Crocker, (1960), 2 All E.R. 629.)
Solicitors apprentice, even though remuneratedat irregular
intervals, is nevertheless "gainfully employed" within the
National Insurance Act
1946
and liablefor contributions:
In order to determine whether a person is within
the class of employed persons in s. i (2)
(a)
of the
National Insurance Act, 1946,
vi%.,
"persons gain
fully occupied in ... employment under a contract
of service" two questions must be decided, namely,
(a)
whether the person is employed under a contract
of service and then (&) whether he is gainfully
occupied, but it is not necessary that the gain should
be derived from the contract of service.
On August 31, 1954, K. entered a solicitor's
employment as an articled clerk. The articles of
clerkship were in the usual form and contained no
provision for any remuneration to the clerk. Before
the articles were drawn up, the solicitor explained
to K. that he would receive no remuneration. At
Christmas, 1954, the solicitor gave £10 to K.,
because he liked K. and because it was Christmas.
At Christmas, 195 5, he gave £25 to K., for the same
reasons. In January, 1956, the solicitor told K that
he was pleased with him and that, in recognition of
his work, he would give him £100 in 1956 which
he was to spend on holidays and not to use for his
general living expenses. It was arranged that K.
should receive the money in four equal payments
when he wanted them, and K. received cheques
for £25 in March, July, September and December,
1956. From Nov. 17, 1956 to July 8, 1957, K. was
absent from the office, with the solicitor's permission,
attending a firm of law tutors. On July 8, 1957, after
successfully completing his examinations, he returned
to the solicitor's office, and continued to work
there until the term of the articles expired on Aug.
30, 1957, being paid £5 a week during this period.
On the question whether K. was included in the class
of employed persons or in the class of non-employed
persons, for the purposes of the National Insurance
Act, 1946, during the period from Jan. i, 1956 to
Dec. 31, 1956, it was not disputed that during that
period K. was employed under a contract of service.
Held, by Salmon J.: K. was included in the class
of employed persons for the purposes of the Act
of 1946, from Jan. i, 1956 to Dec. 31, 1956 because
(i) in the circumstances, the £100 given to K.
during 1956 was intended to be in payment for
services, and was not given to him as a personal
present.
(ii) he was thus a person "gainfully occupied in
employment .
.
. under a contract of service",
within s.i (2)
(a)
of the Act of 1946, although the
contract of service made no provision for payments
to him.
(iii) the fact that a person, when he entered into
his employment had no hope, intention or desire of
obtaining gain was irrelevant, if he was subsequently
paid for his services during the course of his employ
ment, to the question whether he was "gainfully
occupied" for the purposes of the Act.
(Benjamin
v.
Minister of Pensions and of National
Insurance—1960, 2 All E.R. 851).
OBITUARY
Miss ADELAIDE M. QUIN, solicitor, died on the
3ist July, 1960 at Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital,
Drogheda, Co. Lough.
Miss Quin served her apprenticeship with the late
Mr. John Quin, Ardee, Co. Louth, was admitted in
Easter Sittings,
1929
and practised at Ardee,
Co. Louth.
DISTRICT JUSTICE TIMOTHY P. COFFEY died on the
4th August, 1960 at Barrington's Hospital, Limerick.
Justice Coffey served his apprenticeship with the
late Mr. John Mackay, Dundalk and
the late
Mr. Patrick J. Kerley, Dundalk, was admitted in
Trinity Sittings, 1916 and practised at Dundalk,
Co. Louth up to his appointment as District Justice
in 1932.
MR. WILLIAM FRANKLIN died on the 4th August,
1960 at Sir Patrick Dun's Hospital, Dublin.
Mr. Franklin served his apprenticeship with the
late Mr. Alfred Lane Joynt, 4 St. Stephen's Green,
Dublin and Mr. Robert E. English, 7 St. Stephen's
Green, Dublin, was
admitted
in Michaelmas
Sittings, 1938 and practised at 24 South Anne
Street, Dublin.
44