GOOD ADVICE TO LITIGANTS.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXIX, Issue 112, 3 July 1911, Page 6

GOOD ADVICE TO LITIGANTS.

in two suits AA’hich have been hoard •in the-Supreme Court dining the last few days the Bench has; rendered actual* and potential litigants .sympathetic good .service by advising them to keen out of Court (remarks the Sydney “Daily Telegraph”). In one case the (inferences of medical men Avero involved, apparently in connection with membership and non-mem-bership of an organisation in that profession. Without offering any opinion on the merits of tho action, his Honour suggested, as soon as the case Avas opened, that it Avas a pit y two medical gentlemen “should come to Court to settle their differences.” However one may feel aggrieved by alleged comments made upon him by another, whoa that ether is found minimising the references and denying that some of them were made, a case of peaceful compromise seems ;(:•:>■ be made out. In a subsequent action the'jury avss endorsed by the Judge in expressing the opinion that the. Avords said to have been used Avero uttered, if at all, under tiie excitement of an election, and that the matter should not have been brought into Court. It will save individuals money and Avorry. and conduce to their oavu relations with the community and peace of mind, if the effect of this is to restrain those who arc quick to invoke the Courts over trivial personal matters. Because a man is concerned in an election or differs from another in regard to the advisability of unionising is no reason Avby bo should be vilified or belittled, but reasonable allowance should be made for conflict of opinion and the acerbity AA'ith Avhich it sometimes expresses itself. The Court might take a short Avay with cases which it thought should not qccupy it, but doubtless is generally disinclined to do so when litigants prefer to contest the rights that they consider arc involved; in which case the Bench probably achieves its amiable object all the ‘■.Arte by remarking on the seeming triviality of the issue. How much better would it be for the parties, however, if they recognised all this in advance and kept out of Court as a matter of broad and mostly right principle. ■