The Gazette 1911-12

The Gazette of the Incorporated Law Society of Ireland.

[MARCH, 1912

Labourers (Ireland) Act, 1906. COSTS OF APPROVAL AND EXECUTION OF STATUTORY RECEIPTS. THE Tralee Rural District Council having acquired compulsorily certain plots, for the purpose of the Labourers (Ireland) Acts, upon the estate of Lord Headley. the costs of Messrs. O'Keeffe and Lynch, Solicitors for the Owner, of proving title, came before Mr. McHugh, Taxing Officer, appointed under the Labourers (Ireland) Order, for taxation. The owner's Solicitors claimed costs against the Rural District Council in respect of the approval and . execution of thirty statutory receipts taken by the Rural District Council in respect of the thirty plots acquired, none of such receipts were for an amount exceeding £60, but the aggregate amount of compensa tion for the entire of the lands acquired did exceed £60. The Taxing Officer having expressed a desire that the question of the allowance of the costs against the Rural District Council of the approval and execution of such receipts should be argued before him by Counsel, Mr. Macrory (instructed by Messrs. O'Keeffe & Lynch) was heard in support of the claim of the owner's Solicitors upon the 28th February. A separate receipt in respect of each plot having been required by the Rural District Council, it was admitted that the case was not within Section 11, Sub-Sec. (4) of the Labourers (Ireland) Act, 1906, but the Taxing Officer was not satisfied that the receipt was a conveyance within the meaning of Section 82 of the Lands Clauses Con solidation Act, 1845. The owner's Solicitors have received the following letter from the Taxing Officer :— Offices—50 Lr. Sackville Street, Dublin, 2nd March, 1912. Tralee R.D.C. and Lord Headley'& Costs. DEAR SIRS, I have carefully considered the" arguments which were addressed to me by Counsel for Lord Headley at the taxation of the above costs on the 28th ulto., in support of the view that the owner was entitled to have allowed to him on taxation the costs necessarily and properly incurred by him in connection with the approval and execution of some thirty

of some land for sale, who was a client of his, and made certain proposals, and made arrangements to meet an architect. With regard to the investments, the Solicitor, on a similar occasion, told the client that certain bonds were a good investment, and suggested that the client should invest in them. The client went to his broker and bought some in the ordinary way ; and for this a charge was made by the Solicitor. In another after- dinner conversation the Solicitor suggested a speculation in rubber shares, and some were bought, the client saying that he regarded it as a joint speculation of the Solicitor and himself, but the Solicitor made a charge as such in regard to the transaction. The Taxing Master had allowed the items complained of, and this was a summons to review the taxation. Mr. Justice Warrington, in the course of his judgment, said that on all questions as to the retainer of a Solicitor he was guided by the words of Vice-Chancellor Turner in Crossley v. Crowther (9, Hare, 384), who laid down that where there was a conflict as to the authority between the Solicitor and client, without further evidence, weight must be given to the affidavit against, rather than to the affidavit of the Solicitor. As regarded the purchase of land, for all the client knew to the contrary, the work was being done by the Solicitor in a friendly way, knowing that he had a client with land for sale, and that the other client was minded to buy some land. This client positively denied that he gave any instructions to the Solicitor to do business as such in regard to the matter, and the Court could not draw any inference of retainer. As to the investments—advising about investments and making them for I clients was not Solicitors' business ; though I where a Solicitor was retained to act generally for a client, he might properly give advice as to investments and charge for it. But here the Solicitor merely did certain specified pieces of business ; and the positive denials of the client that he gave the Solicitor a retainer must be accepted, and the objections to the taxation allowed. (Reported The Times Law Reports, Vol. xxviii., page 201.)