COST OF THE LAW

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LV, Issue 17502, 26 February 1931, Page 9

COST OF THE LAW

FIGHT FOR A COTTAGE BARRISTER’S PLAN *■ JIATIONALISATIUX NEEDED” LONDON Jan. 8. Is the; law too dear? It lias to he decided whet her a town should use a reservoir over a coal-mine. The decision of this simple question cost the coal company £77,000 in legal expenses. A recent action to recover £40,000 from underwriters cost one side more than £89,000, including an appeal.

twenty-three barristers took part in legal proceedings arising out of alleged secret commission. One of them—Mr. E. F. Bpence, K.C. —received more than A'8039. There were altogether six actions and appeals, and the costs of one appeal were about £IO,OOO. These incredible, hut almost commonplace instances of the enormous cost of going to law in England are among a great variety quoted hv Mr. Claude Mullins, the barrister author of “The Leipzig Trials,” in an instructive and almost exciting book, “In Quest of Justice,” with an introductory letter by Fir Leslie. Scott, K.C., the former Soli-citor-General.

Mr. Mullins asserts that the legal system needs “rationalisation,” and he says that no profession is suffering from tnc trade depression more than that of the. lawyers. Dear law is making lawyers poor. Legal reform movements have in the. past raised great controversy and passion.

ABOVE THE, LAW

Lord Hewart, the Lord Chief Justice, and others have indicted the new form of “bureaucratic justice” by which Government departments are put above the law, but Mr. Mullins retorts: “I have read many judicial and other protests against bureaucratic justice without discerning any recognition that we lawyers are very largely to blame.” It is not only the cost but the uncertainty of the' law that often, causes amazement.

A landlord claimed possession of a cottage at lteigate (rent about £4O) on the ground that it was ‘decontrolled.” He got an order in the county court. The tenant, a woman, apnealed to the High Court, which decided^ hat the county court was wrong. Them the landlord appealed to the Anpeal Court, which decided that, after all, the county court was right. It cost the woman tenant of the cottage £2OO to discover that her cottage was decontrolled.

Mr. Mullins makes various suggestions for reform.

One—“the key reinedv”—is -that the Court of Appeal should be made the final court of appeal, as was' intended, and that the delay and cost of further anpeal to the House of Lords-should he abolished.