Healy v Healy

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 15 January 1866
• Date: 15 January 1866
• Court: Court of Common Pleas (Ireland)

Common Pleas.

HEALY

and

HEALY.

Doe d. Jones v. Powell 7 Dowl. 539.

Cudliff v. Walters 2 Moo. & Rob. 232.

In re Tunno v. BirdENR 5 B. & Ad. 488.

COMMON LAW REPORTS. 649 that the pleas sufficiently negative malice, to bring the case within T. T. 1866. CommonPleas. the class of cases to which such protective statutes are applicable. The plea substantially amounts to this TIITE :-" So far as you charge me v. " with aiding and assisting,' I am entitled to this notice under the MATTHEW. " 62nd section of the statute of William, and also to the three months' " bar ; and so far as you charge me with breaking and entering, " what I did was but part of my duty as constable, such duty having " been imposed upon the Excise by the 7 & 8 G. 4, c. 53, ss. 114, " 115, and 1 & 2 W. 4, c.:55, and transferred from the Excise to the "constabulary by the 20 & 21 Vic., c. 40; and therefore, as such " constable, I am entitled to the same protection." We have, therefore, come to the conclusion that these pleas are well founded. With regard to the venue plea, we do not think it good ; it was not indeed much relied on at the Bar ; and we do not entertain any doubt but that the Common Law Procedure Act has made the venue transitory, even without any direct repeal of the provision in the former Act. We therefore allow the demurrer to the fourth and seventh deÂÂfences, and over-rule the demurrer to the fifth and sixth. HEALY v. HEALY.* H. T. 1866. Jan. 15. IN this case a conditional order to confirm an award having been After the ser- vice of the no- obtained on a former day, the defendant now appeared to show tics given by the 19 & 20 cause against its being made absolute. It appeared that certain Vie., c. 113, s. 16, requiring the opposite party to appoint a new arbitrator as a condition precedent to the appointment of a sole arbitrator, seven clear days must elapse, upon any of which the opposite party might appoint an arbitrator; and, therefore, the time that inÂÂtervened between the expiration of a reference and the subsequent enlargement of the time for making the award by order of a Judge, cannot be counted in the seven days. Quare.-Whether the refusal of an arbitrator, after having heard a portion of the case, to act any further in the matter, constitutes such a " disagreement," within the meaning of the Common Law Procedure Act 1856, as would authorise the interposition of the umpire? Coram MONAHAN, C. J., CHRISTIAN and 011AGAN, JJ. voL. 17. 82 L 650 COMMON LAW...