Page images
PDF
EPUB

Parliamentary Agent-Costs as Such-Taxation-Solicitors Act, 1843, s. 37; House of Commons Costs Taxation Act, 1847 (10 & 11 Vict. c. 69); House of Lords Costs Taxation Act, 1849 (12 &13 Vict. c. 78).

A bill of costs delivered by a parliamentary agent, who is likewise a solicitor, which relates exclusively to business done by him in the capacity of a parliamentary agent, and not in that of a solicitor, cannot be referred for taxation in the High Court under section 37 of the Solicitors Act, 1843 (6 & 7 Vict. c. 73). Decision of King's Bench Division reversed. Re Baker Lees & Co. (C. A., 15 Dec., 1902) [1903] K. B. 189: 72 L. J. K. B. 136; 87 L. T. 662; 51 W. R. 246 19 T. L. R. 113.

Crown -see "Byelaws," Locomotives on Highways."

Delegation:-see also" Public Libraries."

Closet Accommodation-Sub-committee of Sanitary Committee Confirmation without discussion by Sanitary Committee and Corporation of proceedings of Sub-committee-Local Act.

A sub-committee having taken into consideration certain premises, recommended that under the provisions of a local act, the owners be required to provide therefor privies or water closets or to make certain specified alterations of existing privies and water closets, and that notices be served by the town clerk upon the owners to execute such works within 28 days. This recommendation was approved and adopted by the sanitary committee without discussion and the proceedings and resolution of that committee were subsequently approved by the town council without discussion. Held that the proceedings of the sub-committee became in pursuance of the confirmation by the sanitary committee and the council the proceedings of the corporation. WOOD v. WIDNES CORPORATION (1898) (1 Q. B. 463) and Cook v. WARD (1877) (2 C. P. D. 255 ; 41 J. P. 439), distinguished. Agnew v. Manchester Corporation (K. B. D. 28 Oct., 1902), 67 J. P. 174; 1 L. G. R. 9.

Disqualifications:

Corporate Office - Bankruptcy - Quo Warranto--Bankruptcy Act, 1883, s. 32; Municipal Corporations Act, 1882, s. 87. Section 32 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict. c. 52) which disqualifies a bankrupt from being elected to or holding or exercising the office of mayor, alderman, or councillor, applies to persons who become bankrupt whether before or after their election to a corporate office. If a bankrupt is elected to the office of municipal councillor the remedy of mandamus to hold a fresh election is not available; but his right to hold the office may be

Disqualifications-continued.

questioned by a writ of quo warranto notwithstanding that by section 87 of the Municipal Corporations Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 50), his right to be elected may be questioned by election petition. Rex v. Beer, ex parte Tyer; Rex v. Mayor of Ealing (K. B. D., 28 May, 1903), [1903] 2 K. B. 693: 72 L. J. K. B. 608; 89 L. T. 412; 52 W. R. 221; 67 J. P. 326; 1 L. G. R. 634; 19 T. L. R. 531.

[ocr errors]

Drains --see Sewers and Drains."

Drugs, Sale of Food and--see “Sale of Food and Drugs Acts.
Election --see also " Disqualifications.”

Illegal Practice · Election Petitions Relief to Candidate-
Municipal Elections (Corrupt and Illegal Practices) Act, 1848,

S. 20.

Whilst as a general rule the Court will not give relief under section 20 of the Municipal Elections (Corrupt and Illegal Practices) Act, 1884 (47 & 48 Vict. c. 70) to a candidate against the consequences of an illegal act if an election petition is pending, relief may be granted where there is no substantial allegation in the petition beyond the illegal act for which relief is sought and there is no real dispute as to the facts. Ex parte Forster (K. B. D., 25 May, 1903), 89 L. T. 18; 67 J. P. 322; 1 L. G. R. 632; 19 T. L. R. 525.

Elementary Education:

Powers of School Boards-Pupil Teachers' Centres-Ultra vires. A school board were held to have no power under the Elementary Education Acts to provide and maintain separate schools, called pupil teachers' centres, for the purpose of supplying higher education to pupil teachers. REX 7. COCKERTON ([1901] 1 K. B. 726) followed. Decision of Chancery Division affirmed. Dyer v. London School Board (C. A., 5 Aug., 1902), [1902] 2 Ch. 768: 72 L. J. Ch. 10; 87 L. T. 225; 51 W. R. 34; 18 T. L. R. 804.

Endowed Schools:

Scheme for-Abrogation of Existing Statutes of School.

All existing statutes relating to an endowed school are except so far as they may be expressly saved, abrograted when a scheme is made under the Endowed Schools Acts, 1869 to 1889, for the government and management of the school. Decision of Court of Appeal reversed and decision of King's Bench Division restored. Dean and Chapter of Chester v. Bishop of Chester (H. L., 18 Dec., 1902), 87 L. T. 618; 19 T. L. R. 131.

Factories:

Non-textile Factory-“Electrical Station"—" Public Building"
Workhouse-Factory and Workshop Act, 1901, s. 149 (1.)
Sched. 6, Part I. (20).

An engine-house and machinery, forming part of the premises of a workhouse and infirmary, were used for the purpose of generating electrical energy for lighting the workhouse and infirmary, and for working hydraulic lifts, &c. One of the engines was not securely fenced. Held that the workhouse was a public building within schedule 6, Part I., clause 20, which in effect defines "electrical stations" to be "any premises or that part of any premises in which electrical energy is generated or transformed for the purpose of supply by way of trade, or for the lighting of any street, public place, or public building, &c., and was therefore a non-textile factory within the meaning of section 149 (1) of the Factory and Workshop Act, 1901 (1 Edw. 7, c. 22). Mile End Guardians v. Hoare (K. B. D., 8 July, 1903), [1903] 2 K. B. 483 ; 72 L. J. K B. 651 ; 89 L. T. 276 ; 67 J. P. 395 I L. G. R. 732; 19 T. L. R. 606.

Escape from Fire-Two Factories in One Building-Tenement
Factory-Notice to Construct Works-Separate Notices for each
Factory-Owner's Right to Enter on Occupier's Factory-Factory
and Workshop Act, 1901, ss. 14 (2) (3) (7), 87, 149.

A building in one ownership comprised, upon separate floors, two factories, each of which produced its own motive power. Notice having been served by the local authority upon the owners to provide better means of escape from fire, an arbitration took place at which the owners were not present, and an award was made that an additional staircase ought to be constructed in the upper floors of the building communicating with each of the intermediate floors. The notice of the local authority requiring the staircase to be made and the award treated the building as a whole, and did not deal with each factory separately. Held that the fact that the owners were not present did not exempt them being bound by the arbitration; that the two factories did not constitute one tenement factory inasmuch as the occupiers produced their own power, and the building was therefore not one "where mechanical power is supplied to different parts of the same building by different persons" within section 149 of the Factory and Workshop Act, 1901 (1 Edw. 7, c. 22); that the notices and the award were bad in not having treated the factories as separate factories; and that there was no right of entry under the Act on one of the factories to construct works for the benefit of the other factory. Toller v. Spiers & Pond, Ltd. (Ch. D., 16 Dec., 1902), [1903] 1 Ch. 362; 72 L. J. Ch. 191: 87 L. T. 578; 51 W. R. 381; 67 J. P. 234: 1 L. G. R. 193; 19 T. L. R. 119.

Fertilizers and Feeding Stuffs Act, 1893 :

Invoice with False Description-Course of Business Liability of Manager-Fertilizers and Feeding Stuffs Act, 1893, ss. 3 (1), 5. Section 3 (1) of the Fertilizers and Feeding Stuffs Act, 1893 (56 & 57 Vict. c. 56) renders liable to a penalty any person who sells any article for use as a fertilizer of the soil, or as food for cattle, and causes or permits any invoice or description of the article sold by him to be false in any material particular to the prejudice of the purchaser. Held that the taking of a sample and its analysis by a district analyst in accordance with section 5 of the Act was not a condition precedent to proceedings under the provision in section 3 (1), and that a managing director who would in the ordinary course of business know the general form of invoice used and would see the invoices sent and the guarantee on them was liable to be convicted, although there was no evidence that he had seen a particular invoice which was false in a material particular. Korten v. West Sussex County Council (K. B. D., 25 March, 1903), 72 L. J. K. B. 514; 88 L.. T. 466; 67 J. P. 167 ; 1 L. G. R. 445; 19 T. L. R. 354.

Food and Drugs, Sale of see "Sale of Food and Drugs Acts.”

Foreshore :

Newcastle-on-Tyne Rights of Crown.

The foreshore below ordinary high-water mark and the bed to midstream of the river Tyne opposite to the manors of Gateshead and Whickham between certain specified limits is vested in the King as part of the hereditary revenues of the Crown by virtue of the Acts, 6 & 7 Will 4, c. 19, and 21 & 22 Vict. c. 45, as parcel of the said manors or in right or as parcel of the sea or County Palatine of Durham, subject to certain leases-Attorney-General v. Newcastleupon-Tyne Corporation (K. B. D., 27 April, 1903), 67 J. P. 155.

[blocks in formation]

Automatic Meter-Larceny-Liability of Consumer.

Gas was supplied to a consumer by means of an automatic meter which gave a certain supply when a shilling was dropped into a slot. The respondents only had control over the meter of which they kept the key. There was no agreement. The meter was robbed of several shillings which had been placed in it to obtain a supply of

gas. Held that the contract was that the respondents undertook to supply the appellant with one shilling's worth of gas if he put a shilling into a slot, that his only duty in the matter was not to be negligent; and that he was not liable to pay again in respect of the money stolen. Edmundson v. Longton Corporation (K. B. D., 31 Oct., 1902), 19 T. L. R. 15.

Testing-Sunday—“ Daily "--Metropolis-Gas Light and Coke and other Companies Acts Amendment Acts, 1880, s. 7.

By the South Metropolitan Gas Co.'s Acts of 1869 and 1876, provision is made for testing the quality of the gas supplied. The testing places are to be provided by the company, and to be under the control of the London County Council, and "daily testings" are to be made by gas examiners appointed by the council. By section 7 of the Gas Light and Coke and Other Companies Acts Amendment Act, 1880 (43 & 44 Vict., c. clxxxi.), applicable to all the metropolitan gas companies, the provisions as to daily testings were substantially re-enacted by a section which provided that a gas examiner should at each testing-place make daily such number of testings as the gas referees appointed by the Board of Trade should prescribe. A provision in the Act of 1869, which was to be read with the Act of 1880, defined “day" as twenty-four hours, reckoned from 9 a.m. in one day to 9 a.m. in the next. The practice under these and similar Acts relating to other metropolitan gas companies until 1902 had been to test on week-days only. Held that the literal meaning of "daily" in the Act of 1880, read with the Act of 1869, with reference to the South Metropolitan Gas Co. was "every day," including Sundays, taking the day as commencing at 9 a.m., and that the practice prevailing under similar provisions in previous Acts of Parliament from 1869 to 1880 was not sufficient to justify the court in construing the Act of 1880 with reference to that practice, in accordance with the principle suggested by Lord Macnaghten in COMMISSIONERS FOR SPECIAL PURPOSES OF INCOME TAX 7. PEMSEL ([1891] A. C. 531, 591), and that therefore the gas examiners appointed by the London County Council were entitled to test on Sundays the gas supplied by the company. London County Council V. South Metropolitan Gas Company (Ch. D., 4 May, 1903), [1903| 2 Ch. 532; 72 L. J. Ch. 536; 88 L. T. 623; 52 W. R. 45; 67 J. P. 342; 1 L. G. R. 501; 19 T. L. R. 441.

Highways :--(1) Dedication and Ownership—see also “ Streets (2) Vesting.

"

Highway Used as Tow-path--Repair by Conservators --Extent of Highway.

A highway ran alongside the river Thames and was repaired by the plaintiffs because it was used as a towpath. Between the road and defendant's property was a triangular strip of ground in the centre of which was the lock-keeper's house. The defendant built a house on his land with a front gate opening on the triangular strip and the plaintiffs claimed an injunction to prevent him trespassing on the strip. Held that as the roadway was narrow and liable to floods the inference * Affirmed (C. A. 8 Dec., 1903), (1904] 1 Ch. 76; 73 L. J. Ch. 136; 89 L. T. 618; 52 W. R. 161; 68 J. P. 5.

« EelmineJätka »