CO129-366 - Governor Sir Lugard Acting Governor May - 1910 [4-5] — Page 596

CO129 Colonial Office Hong Kong Records 理藩院香港檔案 All AI Reviewed

(Enclosure 1.

do.

591

be objected to by the respondent and in view of the precedents set by Mr. Gompertz and Mr. Rees Davies the objection would probably be successful.

In connection with this aspect of the case I enclose copy of a minute by the Crown Solicitor and of one by Mr. Hazeland as Acting Attorney General. No action was taken at the time on these minutes pending an actual pronouncement by Mr. Rees Davies as to whether he would or would not hear the appeal against Sir F. Piggott's decision as to costs in the first Habeas Corpus case. It is suggested in these minutes that the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown should be obtained, if it has not been already obtained on some previous occasion, as to whether the Attorney who has advised in any proceedings is disqualified from sitting as a Judge in the same proceedings on the ground of interest.

It is doubtful, however, whether the Judges would feel themselves bound by any pronouncement which Your Lordship might obtain from the Law Officers of the Crown as to the application of the principle of "disqualification for interest", and the only remedy as it seems

Edit History

2026-06-25 04:29:46 · NVIDIA / meta/llama-4-maverick-17b-128e-instruct

Live

View comparison

AI Proofread

(Enclosure 1.do.591be objected to by the respondent and in view of the precedents set by Mr. Gompertz and Mr. Rees Davies the objection would probably be successful.In connection with this aspect of the case I enclose copy of a minute by the Crown Solicitor and of one by Mr. Hazeland as Acting Attorney General. No action was taken at the time on these minutes pending an actual pronouncement by Mr. Rees Davies as to whether he would or would not hear the appeal against Sir F. Piggott's decision as to costs in the first Habeas Corpus case. It is suggested in these minutes that the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown should be obtained, if it has not been already obtained on some previous occasion, as to whether the Attorney who has advised in any proceedings is disqualified from sitting as a Judge in the same proceedings on the ground of interest.It is doubtful, however, whether the Judges would feel themselves bound by any pronouncement which Your Lordship might obtain from the Law Officers of the Crown as to the application of the principle of "disqualification for interest", and the only remedy as it seems

Baseline (Original)

(Enclosure 1.do.591be objected to by the respondent and in view of the precedents set by Mr. Gompertz and Mr. Rees Davies the objection would probably be successful.In connection with this aspect of the case I enclose copy of a minute by the Crown Solicitor and of one by Mr. Hazeland as Acting Attorney General. No action was taken at the time on these minutes pending an actual pronouncement by Mr. Rees Davies as to whether he would or would not hear the appeal against Sir F. Piggott's decision as to costs in the first Habeas Corpus case. It is suggested in these minutee that the opinion of the Law officere of the Crown should be obtained, if it has not been already obtained on some previous occasion, as to whether the Attorney who has advised in any proceedings is disqualified from sitting as a Judge in the same proceed-ings on the ground of interest.6.It is doubtful, however, whether the Judges would feel themselves bound by any pronouncement which Your Lordship might obtain from the Law Officers of the Crown as to the application of the principle of "disqualification for interest", and the only remedy as it seems

2026-06-25 04:29:46 · Baseline

View content

(

Enclosure 1.

do.

591

be objected to by the respondent and in view of the

precedents set by Mr. Gompertz and Mr. Rees Davies the

objection would probably be successful.

In connection with this aspect of the case I

enclose copy of a minute by the Crown Solicitor and of one

by Mr. Hazeland as Acting Attorney General.

No action was

taken at the time on these minutes pending an actual

pronouncement by Mr. Rees Davies as to whether he would

or would not hear the appeal against Sir F. Piggott's

decision as to costs in the first Habeas Corpus case. It

is suggested in these minutee that the opinion of the Law

officere of the Crown should be obtained, if it has not

been already obtained on some previous occasion, as to

whether the Attorney who has advised in any proceedings is

disqualified from sitting as a Judge in the same proceed-

ings on the ground of interest.

It is doubtful,

however,

whether

the Judges would feel themselves bound by any pronouncement

which Your Lordship might obtain from the Law Officers of

the Crown as to the application of the principle of

"disqualification for interest", and the only remedy as it

seems

Comments

Approved members can add comments, bookmarks, and private notes.

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.