29 / 364
against the share ofthe proceeds held by the husband's
solicitors, which share, after adjustments for arrears
of maintenance, rates, etc., eventually amounted to
some £217.
The order was subsequently made
absolute in the sum of £107, the husband's solicitors
having at that date received only £no of the
£217.
(The fact that the order was made absolute
in the sum of £107 rather than £110 was due to
oversight.) The husband's solicitors, who were owed
£170 las. 6d. by the husband in respect of their
costs of the proceedings, appealed, contending that
they had a right of set-off, alternatively a general or
particular lien on the funds held by them to the
amount of those costs. On the appeal, the wife was
not legally aided and did not appear, nor was she
represented. The Law Society appeared as
amicus
curia
at the request of the Court. The husband's
solicitors asked that the garnishee order be amended
so as to substitute the figure of £47 8s. 9d. (£217 odd
less £170 I2s. 6d.) for £107.
The Court of Appeal decided that although only
£110 had been available to be garnished at the time
when the order had been made, this was, in the
circumstances, a technicality, and the Court would
treat the order as having been properly made in
respect of the whole £217. The Court would make
the order asked for by the husband's solicitors, the
Law Society agreeing that this was a proper order in
the circumstances.
Appeal allowed ; appellants to have the costs of
the appeal (which the Court quantified at £47 8s. 9d.,
to avoid the necessity for taxation) the right to
recover those costs
to be set off against
the
£47 8s. 9d., owed under the garnishee order.
(Walters
v.
Miles-Griffiths, The Solicitors' Journal,
Vol. 108, p. 561.)
Disciplinaryjurisdiction over medicalpractitioners.
The Disciplinary Committee of the General
Medical Council found proved against the appellant
a charge that being a registered medical practitioner
he had during a specified period maintained an
improper association with a patient, and held that on
the facts alleged in the charge, which the appellant
admitted, he had been guilty of infamous conduct in
a professional respect. His name was ordered to be
erased from the medical register. On his appeal to
the board it was contended that in all the circum–
stances his conduct, though reprehensible, was not
infamous in a professional respect as defined in
Felix
v.
General Dental Council (1960), A.C. 704.
It was submitted that the committee were wrong
to erase his name from the Register. Lord Upjohn,
giving the judgment, said that the finding of the
committee that on the facts the appellant was guilty
of infamous conduct in a professional respect could
not be challenged. As regard sentence, the board
would be slow to interfere with the exercise by the
Disciplinary Committee of their discretionary power
to impose a sentence of erasure. No general test
could be laid down, for each case must depend
entirely on its own particular circumstances, but for
such a sentence to be set aside it must appear to the
board to be wrong and unjustified. Lord Parker
C.J., in
in re
a Solicitor (1960) 2 Q.B. 212, might
have gone too far when he said that the appellate
court would never differ in the matter of sentence
in cases of professional misconduct. Their lordships
agreed with Lord Goddard C.J.,
in re
a Solicitor
(1956) i W.L.R. 1312, when he said that it would
require a very strong case to interfere with sentence
because the Disciplinary Committee were the best
possible people for weighing the seriousness of the
professional misconduct. The present was not a case
where the board could properly interfere with the
sentence. Appeal dismissed.
(McCoan
v.
General Medical Council, Solicitors'
Journal (Vol. 108), p. 560.)
EXAMINATION
DATES
The attention of Masters and apprentices is drawn
to a slight alteration in the dates for the Law Exam–
inations to be held in September next from those
stated in the May issue of the Gazette at page 9.
The new dates for the examinations are as follows :-
Lasf day
Examination
Date
for entry
First Law
...
ist and 2nd Sept.
lothAug.
Second Law...
3rd, 4th and 5 th Sept.
zothAug.
Third Law
...
ist, 2nd and 3rd Sept.
12th Aug.
LEGAL APPOINTMENT
Mr. A. C. P. Ross, Assistant Revenue Solicitor,
has been appointed Revenue Solicitor in succession
to Mr. W. H. P. England who has retired.
THE REGISTRY
Register A
BRISTOL SOLICITORS require admitted conveyancing assistant,
salary not less than £2,150 Pension scheme. Box No. A.220.
SOLICITOR
Young progressive solicitor for busy city practice.
Experience of conveyancing and probate essential.
Salary £2,000 per annum approximately and prospects
of partnership later.
State age and full details of
experience. Box No. A.22I.