75
of Hong Kong
C
the Registrar of the
Supreme Court of that Coloray
unclo
entitled to demand for his
in Cour
benefit payment from the Crown, a
from the suitors
the
CŁ
од
avent of
Aduvally
each fee which under the Vicè
formerly taken by the
Rules were
Judge
Comp
by
the
Registrar of
The Vice
pespect
f the
Admiralty Court in
like business.
of
That in considering the case
the Registrar M. Wingfield
LEFELD
point out that he had taken the fees
the Court
was to ask whether that
under the direction
of
"
and he
direction
कन्है
Coyal justification
Jees.
for his retaining
retaining those
We
We have considered the matter
and in obedience to
Your Lordship's
have the honor
Commands
Report
That
in
ti
opinion neither
the Chief Justice of Hong Kong,
nor the
are
Registrar of the Supreme Court in law entitled to demand for his
dzen
L
benefit payment from the Crown
from the suitors, of the amount of any fee which under the Vice Admiralty formerly taken by The Judge.
rules was
Dy
by the Registrar of the Vice Admiralty, Covert in respect of the like business
Neither of the Officers mentioned
is in our
opinion the same Officer.