The Gazette 1961 - 64

Held, that as the parties had agreed to September 30 as the date for completion and had signed the contract (the solicitor quite properly inserting at a later stage September 30 as the date for completion) there was a binding agreement which could not be varied by oral evidence of uncommunicated thoughts or reservations of the vendor ; alternatively, that if no completion date had been agreed, condition 4 of the National Conditions of Sale provided a time for completion and that therefore the purchaser was entitled to specific performance of the contract, or there was a sufficient memorandum in writing by virtue of certain letters of an oral agreement on August ii making October 16 the date for com pletion. (Smith v. Mansi, 1963 i Weekly Law Reports, page 26.) Costs wasted—responsibility of solicitors for costs thrown away A husband petitioned for divorce. The petition was duly served on the wife, who took it to her solicitors. She was seen by T, a partner in the firm ; she handed him the petition and told him that she wished to defend the suit. She said that she no longer lived at the address shown in the petition. She also handed him a letter from the husband's solicitors addressed to her at her new address. Subsequently, T sent the wife a number of letters addressed to her old address, but he received no reply to any of these letters. In the result, the wife heard nothing about the proceedings until after the husband had been granted a decree nisi in an undefended suit. The wife changed her solicitors and successfully moved the Divisional Court for an order rescinding the decree nisi and directing a rehearing of the suit, leave being given to the wife to file an answer to the petition. The question arose as to who should pay the husband's costs thrown away. Cairns, J., said that it was the duty of a solicitor to make quite sure that he had his client's correct address. The fact that no reply was received to communications sent to the wife should have put T on inquiry. In the result, T, in perfect good faith but with a lack of that diligence which it was the duty of solicitors to observe, failed to ascertain or, if he did ascertain, failed to note, his client's change of address, an indication of which was apparent from documents in his possession. It was a case in which an order under r. 8 (i) (<;) of the Supreme Court Costs Rules, 1959, would be made against the firm in which T was, at the material time, a partner condemning them in the costs thrown away by the husband in the abortive suit and also in the costs incurred by him in the wife's motion for the 73

The conditions for payment of full benefit are (i) that not less than 26 employment contributions have been paid on behalf of the claimant, and (z) that 48 contributions have been paid or credited to the claimant for the contribution year preceding the year in which benefit is claimed (i.e., to the preceding 3151 December). COUNTY KERRY LAW SOCIETY At the annual general meeting of the above society held at the Court House, Tralee, on the ist day of December, 1962, the following officers and committee were appointed for the year 1962/63 : President: Mr. Gerald Baily; Vice-President: Mr. John D. O'Connell; Chairman : Mr. Charles J. Downing ; Secretary and Treasurer : Mr. Donal M. King; Committee: Messrs. D. E. Browne, D. J. Courtney, W. A. Crowley, H. J. Downing, J. J. Grace, M. L. O'Connell, J. J. O'Donnell, J. S. O'Reilly and D. Twomey. DECISIONS OF PROFESSIONAL INTEREST Vendor and purchaser—contract with date of completion left blank—intention of parties In March, 1959, a prospective purchaser entered into negotiations for the purchase of a house with the vendor, at whose suggestion it was agreed that the vendor's solicitor should act for both parties ; it was further agreed that completion should take place on September 30, 1959. In June, 1959, the purchaser paid the defendant a deposit. On July 2, 1959, the solicitor sent a written form of contract to the purchaser who signed it and sent it to the vendor who also signed it on July 5, 1959, and took it to the solicitor. On July 7, the vendor informed the solicitor that he wished to extend the completion date until the end of October instead of September and told him that the contract was to be held " pro tern, for instructions ". Both the vendor and the purchaser thought that the contract would not become binding unless and until it had been exchanged. The contract was undated and the date for completion left blank but it was subject to the National Conditions of Sale by which the date could be ascertained if the parties failed to agree. Shortly after receiving the contract the solicitor dated it and filled in the date for completion as September 30, 1959. On August n, 1959, the purchaser and the vendor orally agreed that the date for completion should be postponed until October 16, 1959, but that alteration of the date was never put in the contract. The vendor' subsequently refused to complete the contract. In an action by the purchaser for specific perfor mance Wilberforce J. held there was no enforceable contract. On appeal by the plaintiff:—