BANKERS AND SOLICITORS

Dominion, Volume 29, Issue 185, 4 May 1936, Page 12

BANKERS AND SOLICITORS

Interesting English Case A case of some importance to both bankers and (solicitors was decided in the courts last week, says the "Economist ’ of March 21. The wife of a solicitor had obtained a divorce from him, and the solicitor owed £l5O in costs. The Divorce Division thereupon made and served upon the solicitor’s bank a garnishee order nisi ordering "that all debts owing or accruing due from the garnishees (i.e., the bank) to the respondent (>.e, the solicitor) not exceeding the sum ot £D>O be attached to satisfy the amount due from the respondent. ...” The bank notified the solicitor of the receipt of this order, which the bank held applied not only to his personal account but also to his clients’ account, established in accordance with the {Solicitors Act. 1933.- As it happened, the had just drawn a cheque on his clients account, and this the bank ultimately turned to the presenter marked “R.D. The solicitor then sued the bank for broach of contract and for libel. The court found in favour of the bank on both points. In brief, notwithstanding the Solicitors Act, the bank was bound by the very general terms of the garnishee order, and it was for the court and not the bank to decide upon any conflicting equitable claims that might exist. The judge.- however, did suggest 'that judgment creditors applying for garnishee orders nisi should realise that they might incur costs unnecessarily if the order was so drawn as to affect a clients’ account. A creditor could always ask the court to restrict the terms of the order so as to exclude clients’ accounts, and the judge hinted that the court might sometimes think it. proper to cal! a judgment creditor’s attention to that aspect of the matter when an order was sought against a practising solicitor This appears the common-sense view of the cast, for innocent parties might be involved in serious hardships by the attachment of a client’s account, says the "Economist. ’’ The plea that the familiar initials "R.D.” were defamatory was dealt with very quickly, ns it was covered by a previous judgment. The initials are perfectly colourless, and mean no , more than the words—"refer to drawer” —for which they stand.