SOLICITORS' FEES.

Auckland Star, Volume LXVI, Issue 50, 28 February 1935, Page 9

SOLICITORS' FEES.

CLAIM ALLOWED. BUT NOT RECOVERABLE. PTTBLIC TRUSTEE'S POSITION.

A decision of considerable interest was delivered by his Honor, Mr. Justice Fair, at the Supreme Court this morning when in entering judgment for an amount claimed against the Public Trustee he said he could not make a direction for the amount to be paid, although he expressed the opinion that the Public Trustee could quite properly pay £200 of the judgment for £298.

The case was an unusual one. In 1931 a man engaged Mr. W. W. Meek, solicitor, of Auckland, to go to Tahiti to endeavour to cancel an option which he had given to a native named for £500 over his plantation in Tahiti, while, it was alleged, ho was in a bad state of health. Mr. Meek went to Tahiti and as a result of his work, an order was made by the Court for the native to vacate the property. Mi. Meek's client later became an inmate oi a mental hospital, and his estate was then vested in the Public Trustee.

Property Sold. Subsequently the property was sold by auction, and realised £1060. The first mortgage of £350 was paid off, and the balance, less French legal charges, was left with the Public Trustee. The plaintiffs, Messrs. Milne and Meek, solicitors, submitted, at the request of the public trustee, a bill in taxable form to the registrar of the Supreme Court, and were awarded £298 7/10, including £60 disbursements. The public trustee then refused to pay the account. The represented by Mr. G. P. Finlay, brought an action seeking judgment for £298 and an order from the Court directing the public trustee to pay the amount. _ Mr. W. H. Cocker appeared for the joint defendants, the inmate of a mental hospital and the public trustee. The case was argued before Mr. Justice Fair on December ,13 last.

Judge's Comments.

In giving Ms reserved judgment today Ms Honor said the bill of costs had been taxed by the registrar of the Supreme Court and allowed at the amount of claim, £29S 7/10. The retainer of plaintiffs by the mental patient and the services rendered had been proved and plaintiffs were entitled to judgment against him for the amount claimed, together with the costs of the action on the middle scale, and disbursements.

Dealing with the application for a direction for payment, his Honor stated that the law was such that the estate of a mental patient must first provide for the patient's maintenance. If, however, in view of the special circumstances of this case, as the fund from which the moneys were derived was obtained largely as a result of the plaintiffs' efforts, the Minister in charge of mental hospitals were to agree _to a portion of the amount in hand being paid to the plaintiffs, the Public Trustee might quite properly pay that 6um up to an amount of £200 if accepted in full satisfaction of the judgment. For these reasons his Honor refused to give the direction asked for by the plaintiffs, but, in the circumstances, without costs.