The Gazette 1964/67

Passed: John G. Black, B.C.L., William M. Cahir, Arthur F. Callanan, Michael G. Daly, B.C.L., LL.B., Thomas W. Enright, Joseph G. Finnegan, John B. Harte, Michael B. Hegarty, Donnchadh D. Lehane, Thomas A. Menton, Robert T. R. McDowell, Josephine M. E. O'Meara, Eleanor A. O'Rourke, Mary Raleigh, B.A., John J. Rochford, John R. Sweeney. 25 candidates attended ; 17 passed. Practice Parties—adding defendants. In Fire, Auto & Marine Insurance Co. v. Greene (1964), D was a motorist insured by P. D was in– volved in an accident in which TP suffered injuries. TP claimed damages from D. P claimed a declaration against D that P was entitled to avoid the policy for nondisclosure or mispresentation and, in accord– ance with s. 207 (3) of the Road Traffic Act, 1960 P served notice of their action on TP, who thereupon became entitled to be made a party to P's action, but failed to exercise this right. Under an agreement with the Minister of Transport, the Motor Insurers' Bureau (MIB) would become liable to satisfy any judgment obtained by TP if it were not satisfied by D or P. When sued by third parties, it was not the practice for MIB to take the point that such parties were not privy to the agreement between MIB and the Minister. MIB applied to be joined as a defendant in the action by P against D. Held, that the court had no power under Rules of Court to add MIB as a defendant. Stamp Duty on Share Deal. In William Cory & Sons Ltd. v. Commissioners of Inland Revenue (Denning, M.R., Danckwerts, L.J., Diplock, L.J. dissenting). An appeal against the decision of Mr. Justice Pennycuick on December jth, 1963, who had held that 89 transfers of shares were not liable to ad valorem stamp duty as transfers on sale, under Section i and the ist Schedule of the Stamp Act, 1891 was allowed. In August 1957 Cory's agreed in principle to purchase the issued share capital of the Palmer Group of Companies. In October, shortly before the completion of the final draft of the agreement, Cory's intimated that they " were not prepared to do more than have an option and that, if the vendors would not give it to them, the deal was off." On November ist the Palmer Group granted an option to purchase for £420,856 and executed 89 transfers of the shares to Cory's. The agreement provided for retransfer if the option was not exercised. On November 2nd the option agreement and CASES OF THE MONTH

transfers were presented for stamping at £2 and ics. each respectively on the basis that they had been made for the protection of the option rights and fell under " Conveyance or Transfer of any kind not hereinbefore described " in the ist Schedule to the Act. The Controller of Stamps directed that they be stamped with ad valorem duty on £420,856 in that they were transfers on sale. The Master of the Rolls said that when the trans– fers were executed they were intended to effect a sale and were intended to operate on a sale. When the option was exercised the transfer did in fact effect a sale. They were therefore transfers on sale and liable to ad valorem duty. Danckwerts, L.J. delivered a concurring judgment. Lord Justice Diplock, dissenting, said that he was reluctantly driven to the conclusion that these instruments of transfer were not transfers " on sale". They transferred the legal property in the shares but not " on the sale thereof " nor to " a purchaser or any other person on his behalf or on his direction". They were therefore liable to a fixed duty of IDS. and not to ad valorem duty. Leave to appeal to the House of Lords was granted. (The Times, Friday, June 26th, 1964.) [See Gazette, ]\ine 1964, Vol. 58, No. 2, pp. 15,16.] Motor Insurers' Bureau. Injury by criminal act. The plaintiff, the chief security officer of a big metal company, saw a van in a car park near the company's premises on the windscreen of which there was a road fund licence which had been stolen from one of the company's cars. He later stopped the car, which was being driven by P, an employee of the company, on a private road about ten yards from the main road. Standing by the van with one hand on the jamb, one hand on the top of the door and his head and shoulders inside, he asked P to pull into the near side of the road ; but P immediately drove off at a fast speed, dragging the plaintiff out into the main road and injuring him. P was convicted of larceny of the road fund licence, of driving a motor vehicle whilst uninsured and of maliciously inflicting grievous bodily harm on the plaintiff. The plaintiff obtained judgment against P for damages for personal injuries, but that judgment was not satisfied. The plaintiff then sued the defendants claiming under their agreement, dated June I7th, 1946, with the Minister of Transport which extended to any judgment " required to be covered by a policy of insurance " under Part 6 of the Road Traffic Act, 1960, for the amount of the unsatisfied judgment against P and obtained judgment. On appeal the defendants contended that P's liability to the plaintiffwas a liability for the consequences of his own wilful and deliberate criminal act and was not 22