INDOMITABLE COUNSEL.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLIV, Issue 13523, 22 August 1907, Page 6

INDOMITABLE COUNSEL.

MR.■ JELLICOE'S PERSISTENCY."

[FROM our own correspondent.]

London, July 12. Tub Court of Appeal on Saturday gave judgment in the case of Leyson (judgment creditor) v. Owen Chambers, and other, and Leyson and Chambers. Both appeals were from orders of Mr. Justice Walton. It appeared that the Cyfarthfa Fireman's Society, an unregistered friendly society, was formed in 1842 for the relief of the sick and sufferers from accidents. Under the rules, the funds of the society were not to be diverted to any other.purpose. On the Employers' Liability Act and the Workmen's Compensation Act coming into force some of the members of the society, thinking it no longer necessary to keep in hand such large funds, became desirous of distributing part of the money, and brought an action in the Chancery Division against the officers of the society to restrain any distribution of the funds' not authorised by the rules. Mr. Justice Farwell granted an interlocutory injunction against any distribution of the funds by the officers or servants of the society, and that injunction was still in force. The defence had been conducted by Mr. Leyson, solicitor, and the appeal was against an order of Mr. Justice Walton, giving judgment for Mr. Levson for his costs of those proceedings against all the members of the society. The second appeal was against an order directing an issue to be tried as to whether or not Messrs. Crawshay Brothers were indebted to Chambers and the other. defendants. ■'■ r '. . - - The Court gave judgment, allowing both appeals, with costs, and directed that the orders should be set aside. ■ Mr. E. G. Jelicoe, for Mr. Leyson. asked the Court to reconsider the question of costs, contending that, in the circumstances, no order should be made. Mr. Justice Buckley said that, of course, it was the duty of counsel to argue strenuously and vigorously, but to show such persistency in an unarguable case was deserving, in his opinion, of the censure of the Court.