The Press. WEDNESDAY, MAY 10, 1893. THE LAW'S DELAY.

Press, Volume L, Issue 8479, 10 May 1893, Page 4

The Press. WEDNESDAY, MAY 10, 1893. THE LAW'S DELAY.

Since the days of Shakespeare, aud probably since much earlier times, legal proceedings have been remarkable for their dilatoriness, and the law's delay is as well known to litigants by painful experience as the law's costliness. We are led to make these remarks by a recent; perusal of the report in the Wellington papers of certain proceedings in the # present session of the Court of Appeal in the case of Claridge v the Union Shipping Compauy. This was a case originally tried in Christchurch. We, of course, have no interest in this case other than thai; which the public at large have. not know Mr. Claridge from the man in the moon, and we are not prepared either to affimi or to deny that he is the injured man he alleged he was. On the other hand, while at all times willing to testify to the enterprise aud other excellent qualities which have for so long characterised the management of the Union Company, we have no more desire that the Company should escape the payment of its just liabilities than that it should be cast in damages which it ought nob to be called on to For our present purpose, it is sufficient to remind our readers that a year or two ago Mr. Claridge, while engaged in discharging cargo on a steamer at Lytteiton received injuries which he considered were caused by tho negligence of servants of the Union Company. He claimed damages accordingly, and after che usual delay characteristic of legal proceedings, his claim wan heard before a Christchurch special jury, who awarded.to him heavy damages—some £1500 or £1600 we believe. Mr. Justice Dans-STON, however, wrested tha fruits of his victory from Claridge by a judgment which exonerated the Company from liability on legal grounds. Claridge after the further customary delays took his case to tho Court of Appeal, and after exhaustive argument the Court of Appeal in elaborate judgments, reversed the decision of Mr Justice Djenniston, and gave judgment for Claridge. The Company, however, was not satisfied with this, and asked for leave to appeal io the Privy Council, which, as the case was an important one, as a matter of principle to the Company, as well as from a pecuniary point of view, was not unreasonably granted. But as the Court of Appeal no doubt thought it was only right that Claridge should not be kept„ in suspense longer than was necessary, they gave leave to appeal subject to the condition that there should be np delay in prosecuting the appeal.

The last sitting of the Court of Appeal was in _\'ovember. It seems that the steps to be taken in an appeal to the Privy Council are simple enough. A transcript of tbe proceedings in the Court of Appeal has to be forwarded to tbe Privy CouuoiUby the and the case is set down to be beard in its order, when the very leisurely and sedate old gentlemen who compose the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council have time to attend to it.

We learn from the proceedings at this sitting of the Court of Appeal that the transcript in t*his case was not forwarded to London till a week or two ago, in fact not till after the proceedings in the present action of the Court of Appeal had been initiated. Mr. Claridge considering that tbe appeal was not being prosecuted with due diligence, applied to the Court of Appeal at.tlie present sittings to revoke the leave to appeal. Not being lawyers we Bhould imagine tbat the transcript of proceedings which we have referred to if it could not have been prepared in twelve hours, could at any rate have been prepared in a week, and that any delay over a week would have been, if not unreasonable, at any rate sufficiently great to require very ample explanation.

On this question of the reasonableness of this delay both parties seem to have filed affidavits in the Court of Appeal, which as usual are in direct contradiction of each other, but as they are not published we cau form no opinion as to which we should elect to believe. The Court of Appeal has just dismissed this application, and the judgments are almost comical in the discordance of the vie ws which they express. These views wore chiefly characterised by doubt. All the Judges expressed doubt on most of the questions involved. The majority doubted whether the Court of Appeal had jurisdiction to entertain the application—that is to say, whether the defendants, having got leave to appeal, the case had not passed to the Privy Council, though, as the papers are still apparently on the high seas, it seems doubtful whether the Privy Council can yet be said to have got a grip of the case. In fact, according to these doubting Judges, the case of Clabidsb v the Union Company is at present a vagrant at large, and not in the legal custody of any Court. When they came to the question of the merits of the application — that is to say whether there had been unreasonable delay in forwarding the proceedings to the Privy Council—the Judges were equally at variance. The Chief Justice was again a doubting disciple. Mr. Justice Conoi___* had recovered from his doubts as to the jurisdiction, and had no earthly doubt that the Union Company had been purposely dilatory, and was keeping Mr. Claridge on tenter-hooks, in the hope of making him accept a smaller sum, and that if he had not moved in the matter the papers woull not have been sent to Loudon till Doomsday, or at auy rate till the next Court of Appeal. Hi did not thus express himself. Wo are making a free translation of his remarks. On tha other hand Mr. Justice Dbnsi_ton and Mr. Justice Ward were equally positive that there

had been no unreasonable delay mprosecuting the appeal, and thati the Union Company had been straining every nerve to force this appeal on and deliver themselves and Claridge from their agonies of suspense. Bub while thus doubting all over the place, if wo may so term it), the Judges unanimously dismissed Clabidge's application, which may be said to have been one for the Company, bub they would not give costs against Claridge, which was one for Claridge.

We express no opinion, and, indeed, have formed no opinion as to which is right, We cannot help regretting that neither Mr. Justice Richmond nor Mr. Justice Williams were present. But we say that the case is worthy of attention, as showing how unsatisfactory is the present system of appeal to the Privy Cou*-**U. We quite admit the •propriety of au appeal, where there are reasonable grounds, to pome Court beyond our own Court of Appeal, and that there must be some delay. But we Bay in the first place that if proper rules were framed ou this subject the delay in forwarding the case to the Privy Counoil should, unless both parties consent, be very short. There is no reason that we can imagine why there should be more than say a mouth's delay iv forwarding the necessary papers to London. Of course we know that would not end the matter. The Privy Council has a great deal to do, and takes a loug time to do it, and is the most dilatory Court on the face of the globe. It is often one, two, and we believe sometimes even three years, before a case can be heard. This is not right, and the colonies have a right to demand from the Imperial Government that some steps should be taken to remedy the evil. The Judicial Committee is composed of retired Indian and other usad-up Their numbers should be increased so as to enable them to overtake their work. There are plenty of these elderly functionaries in London who would be glad of employment with the title of Right Honourable, and some slight increase of their pensions, so the Judicial Committee could easily be enlarged and appeals could be disposed of without heart sickening delay. Men like Claridge should either get their damages paid or be told that their claim is bad, and defendants like the Union Company should not be kept for months and even years with- large claims hanging over their heads. It may be a startling suggestion, but is there anything too absurd in the idea that the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council Bhould go on oircuib and sit in the colonies, if not in India also 1 Tho Judges would find the colonial climate conducive to longevity, and they would find excellent clubs in the colonial capitals, where they could enjoy their evening rubber aud other accustomed refreshments. Colonial litigants would then get the services of their own lawyers, who understand colonial laws, and would not demand the enormous fees which great English advocates demand, too often for only neglecting and misrepresenting the case of their clients.