PASTA EL CLANN
583
Amounting to $1426.35 were paid on the 10th instant.
As Chief Justice Smale was shown to have narrowed his written judgment in that case on the suggestion for the Attorney General by verbally ruling that the Crown's liability to costs should be reserved for further argument, it did not seem to me expedient to take any step which might be interpreted as waiving prerogative so important as the liability of the Crown to costs. I therefore only consented to sign a warrant for the amount when the lawyers on both sides had drawn up and duly recorded a statement mutually agreed on 5th December 1869 that the general liability of the Crown to payment of costs was not to be regarded as affected by the payment made under the special circumstances of Reg v Saint.
As H.M's Government had declined to permit an appeal, notwithstanding the evidently strong opinion entertained by the known lawyers in 1869, they signified their reference to Mr Smale's judgment, and although shortly afterwards in the case of Souza, Mr Smale decided that there could be no costs against the Crown, it might seem under the conflicting decisions of the Court, which H.M's Government nevertheless did not care to dispute, somewhat invidious to...
PASTA EL CLANN
583
famounting to $1426. 35 were paid.
the 10th instant.
As Chief Justice Smale
was
on-
Whewn to have narrowed his written judgment in that
case on'
....
the suggestion for the Attomey General by vert
verbally fudding that the brown's liability to casts should be reserved for further argument, it did not seem to me expedient to take any step which might be interpreted, as wassing prerogative so important as the
liability of the brown to casts. I therefore only consented to sign Warrant for the amount, when the lawnsel on both sides had drawn up und duly recorded a statement mutually
a
a
on
that the general liability of
5o December 1969 agreed
the brown to payment of costs was not to be regarded as affected by the payment made under the special circumstances of Reg v Saint.
As H. Mi's Government had declined to permit an appeal, notwith
-standing the evidently strong opinion Wide Eyelamuse entertained by the known Lawyers in
confidentical. 1 yok
1869.
they sig."" reference to Mr Smalis judgment, and
although shortly afterwards in thee & Souza. Mr Smale decided that there could be no costs against the brown, it might seem
seem under the conflicting
decisions of the Court, which H. Mo's Goverment nevertheles
did not care to
dispute, somewhat invidious to Rup
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.