94 / 264
GAZETTE
APRIL 1977
injunction even though it is not sought to protect a right.
(4) That in the circumstances of the present case leave
should be given to the plaintiff to join the Attorney-
General as a defendant and to claim a declaration that
notwithstanding his refusal to consent to relator
proceedings the plaintiff was entitled (a) to proceed with
his applications for declarations; and (b) pending the final
determination of those applications, to obtain relief by
way of interim injunction.
(1977) 2 W.L.R. 310.
Issuing Shares at a Premium
0Continued from page 67
quite possible that it did not. However, the Legislature,
like the rest of us, does not always say what it means, and
it is on the basis of what it says that we must proceed. It is
not open to a Judge (or indeed anybody else) to hold the
Legislature as saying what he feels it must have meant by
a strained and totally artificial construction of what it
actually said. It is submitted that Mr. Justice Harman was
quite right in refusing to do so, although, it is submitted he
should have been far more explicit as to the reasons for
his refusal in this case.
Some members of the accountancy profession have
suggested that Section 56 (or Section 62) applies when
the book entries relating to the transaction indicate that
there is a premium.
22
It is submitted that this interpre-
tation of the Section is wrong for the reasons advanced
above. If it were correct, then the words "shares issued at
a premium" in Section 56 (or Section 62) would not mean
simply shares issued for a value over and above nominal
value. It would mean the issue of shares for a value over
and above nominal value and the making of the
appropriate accounting entries. As already indicated there
is no authority whatever for restricting the definition of
premium in this way.
23
Therefore, the word premium in
Section 62 of the Companies Act, 1963, must be taken
to have its ordinary dictionary meaning.
22. See Gower (1969 ed.), p. 109, footnote 28.
23. The Jenkins Committee supports this view and recommended that
it should be clearly stated (Cmnd 1749, paragraphs 161-166).
BOOK REVIEWS
JOWITT (The late Earl): Dictionary of English Law.
Second edition by John Burke, 2 vols., 1935 p. London:
Sweet & Maxwell, 1977. £45.00.
The first edition of this work was begun under the
General Editorship of the late Earl Jowitt, a former Lord
Chancellor, who approved the principles upon which it
was compiled. As a result of the labours of the then
Editor, Mr. Clifford Walsh, this compact encyclopaedia
of law was published in 1959. Mr. John Burke, the Editor
70
of the invaluable
Current Law,
has continued in more
detail and with more concentration the learned work of
his predecessor. Despite the fact that this edition has been
published in two volumes, it in fact only contains 30
pages more than its predecessor, a remarkable
achievement considering all the Statute Law that has been
passed and the Case Law that has been adjudicated upon
in the last eighteen years. As the Preface stresses, the
years since 1959 have seen great and frenzied activity,
and of late there has been a cataract of large complex
Acts which seek to legislate in detail for every human
activity. The whole structure of the Courts and of Local
Government in England has been remodelled. There has
been consolidation of Statutes relating
inter alia
to Juries,
Income Tax, Friendly Societies, Building Societies, Town
Planning, Insurance, Solicitors, Adoption and even
Legitimacy. The magnitude of the task allotted to Mr.
Burke can thus be appreciated, but he has overcome all
difficulties with admirable clarity and precision. This is
indeed
the
Dictionary of English Law, and it would be
well nigh impossible to supersede it.
We learn that the "Court of pie poudre" was one which
determined disputes in markets and fairs, that a
"Couthutlaugh" was a person who willingly received an
outlaw and concealed him, that "eavesdroppers" were
persons who stood under walls by night or day to hear
news and to carry it to others to make strife, and that an
"effractor" is a burglar. These few examples should
induce members who wish to improve their legal
vocabulary to consult these volumes frequently. Any time
spent in perusing these volumes will be repaid a
hundredfold by the knowledge acquired. There is also a
very useful Bibliography at the end. The inevitable high
price will preclude members from purchasing these
volumes, but, as a reference volume, the knowledge they
will instil will be of inestimable value.
McGILVRAY, James, Social Statistics in Ireland: a
Guide to their Sources and Uses. Dublin: Institute of
Public Administration, 1977, x, 204 p. £3.50.
A philosopher once made a distinction between lies and
statistics. Many politicians tend to rely unduly on
statistics, particularly if they are favourable to their party.
Those who do will find Mr. McGilvray's work of great
assistance, particularly as he had already published
Irish
Economic Statistics,
and is a statistician of international
merit. Those who wish to wend their way through the
statistical data of health, housing, education, social
security, expenditure and the standard of living, and of
survey methods in social research have been given
invaluable guidance by Mr. McGilvray in this work. The
learned author rightly points out that the most valuable
source of information is the five-yearly census; it is
unfortunate that the census due in May 1976 was
cancelled as an economy measure. There follows a
discussion relating to vital statistics of births and deaths.
Each chapter is followed by detailed sources and
references, and there is a good index at the end. The
problem of housing is tackled from the point of view of
analysis of houses: (i) by size, (ii) by nature of occupancy,
and (iii) by type of dwelling. The various sources from
which data relating to incomes, expenditure and the
standard of living are culled are clearly set out. Mr.
McGilvray's book will be of inestimable help to those who
wish to study and analyse social statistics.