The King (The Postmaster-General) v The Great Northern Railway Company

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 19 April 1907
• Date: 19 April 1907
• Court: Court of Appeal (Ireland)

The King (The Postmaster-General)

and

The Great Northern Railway Co. (1).

Appeal.

CASES

DETERMINED BY

THE KING'S BENCH DIVISION

OF

THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN IRELAND,

AND ON APPEAL THEREFROM IN

THE COURT OF APPEAL,

AND BY

THE COURT FOR CROWN CASES RESERVED.

1908.

Practice — Costs — Proceedings on behalf of the Crown — Mandamus — 9 & 10 Vict. c. 113, s. 5 — 18 & 19 Vict. c. 90.

Held, that the prosecutor was not entitled to the costs incurred before receipt of the notice withdrawing the appeal.

The Postmaster-General obtained an order from the King's Bench Division that a writ of mandamus should issue directing the defendants to run certain trains at the hours, and in the manner, specified by the prosecutor. The defendants served notice of appeal on the 11th February; and on the 26th March, they gave notice to the Postmaster-General that the appeal would not be prosecuted. The prosecutor applied for his costs of the appeal incurred before receipt of the notice of discontinuance.

The prosecutor obtained an order from the King's Bench, that a writ of mandamus should issue against the defendants, and the defendants appealed. Before the appeal came on for hearing the defendants gave notice to the prosecutor that they would not proceed with the appeal:—

Samuels, K.C., and Dudley White, for the Postmaster-General.

Gordon, K.C., and Denning, for the defendants.

The Lord Chancellor:—

This is really an attempt to re-open the question decided by the Court in Madden's Estate(1). We came to the conclusion in that case, that there is no jurisdiction to award costs against the Crown, unless power to do so is expressly given by statute. Counsel for the prosecutor have not been able to point to any such statute. The 18 & 19 Vict. c. 90 does not do so. We intend to follow...