THE MOKAU ESTATE.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XXIII, Issue 219, 25 September 1901, Page 2

THE MOKAU ESTATE.

, • . A QUESTION OF COSTS. THS MXSTERIOCB "MB. F." In the High Court of Justioe, on 2i.d August, 1901, before Mr. Justioe Lawrence, in chambers, an application, referred by tha taxing master to the Court-, was made on behalf of Mr. Wickbam Flower for an order that ' certain coats in the Chancery ao'ion Jones v. Sneath (trustee) and Flower should be held as a set-off in respect to the costs ordered by the Divisional Court on 23rd April last, when sitting as an Appeal Court, from the decision of the Law Society, to be paid by Mr. Flower to Mr. Joshua Jones. Mr. Lewis Thomas for the apptioant said that the cost* arose from the Chano ry action that had been commenced by Mr. Jones and not proceeded with, and these his client wished to have balanced to their extent as against the costs Mr. Flower had beeu ordered by the Divisional Court to pay. Mr. Jones bad been d ssatisfied with the finding of the committee that had completely exonerated Mr. Flower from all the charges made against him, and with some one behind him to pay his costs Mr.Jor.es had appealed to the Court with the result that Mr. Flower was directed to pay ihe costs of the inquiry by tho committee as well as the costs of the appeal. These costs were enormous and it was in the discretion of His Lordship to order the one set of costs to be placed against the other. Couosel quoted cases in support of bis contention. Mr. .Norman Craig, for the respondent, Opposed the application. The*V eaid coanse', weratwo different actions in separate branches of the judicature, one being in the Chancery and the other in the King's Bench Division. Further, the order of.the ptyment of his cos's by Mr. Flower was by way of a fine for his misconduct as a solicitor, the Court having jßefc aside the finding of the committee and held the solicitor to be guilty of improperly acquiring his client's property for bis own benefit while) acting as his solicitor. ■' Counsel read over * the decision of the Judges tiken from the short-hand notes, which stated that the payment of the vf ry heavy cos's by way of a fine was considered by the Court, in addition to the cooviction being recorded, to be sufficient punishment, as it was still open to Mr. Jones to procaed for recovery of hi > property, and submitted that it was not competent under the circumstances for His Lordship to interfere with what was clearly thelnten'ion of the Divisional Court, namely, that the solicitor should be punished for bis improper treatment of Mr. Jones. As to Mr. Jones having anyone bahind him to pay bis costs, that was not true. It was publicly known.that the costs'of the inquiry and appeal were paid by the Law Society from the annual grant voted by Parliament. His Lordship : I shall decline to make any order. Mr. Lewis Thomas: I give notice of appeal, and I ask that the respondent be called upm to give seourity for the costs. Mr. Norman Craig: Oh yes! You take all my client has'from him by improper means. You stand convioted of it, and now you want security for further vexatious litigation. His Lordship: lam satisfied if you go to appeal you will find Mr. Jones I represented there. You may have to pay his cost". The question can be' settled there. I shall make no order as to security.