Timothy v Day

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: K. B. Div.
• Judgment Date: 20 December 1906
• Court: Court of Appeal (Ireland)
• Docket Number: (1906. No. 10,795.)
• Date: 20 December 1906

Timothy

and

Day (1).

K. B. Div.

Appeal.

(1906. No. 10,795.)

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.

Public service — Gratuity to employee — Judgment — Receiver — Superannuation Act, 1859.

A gratuity to a person who, having been an employee in the public service, has been constrained to retire from ill health, awarded by Lords Commissioners of the Treasury, under section 6 of the Superannuation Act, 1859, is not attachable by process of law to answer a judgment recovered against such employee.

Motion on behalf of the Postmaster-General to discharge an ex parte order, dated the 9th November, 1906, obtained by the plaintiff who had recovered judgment for £35 and costs in the action, appointing the plaintiff receiver by way of equitable execution over a certain gratuity to which the defendant was entitled from the General Post Office, Dublin.

It appeared from the affidavit of R. A. Egerton, Secretary to the Post Office in Ireland, that the defendant had been an employee of the Post Office as sorting-clerk and telegraphist from November, 1897, to the 17th August, 1906, when he was compelled to retire in consequence of pulmonary disease, which rendered him permanently incapable of discharging the duties of his situation. His length of service did not entitle him to a pension, and the Post Office authorities recommended him to the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury for a gratuity, and he was awarded by them on the 21st September, 1906, a sum of £37 19s. 9d., under the provisions of the Superannuation Act, 1859 (22 Vict c. 26), s. 6 (2).

The letter of the Treasury, notifying the award of the gratuity, was as follows:—

“Treasury Chambers,

“21st September, 1906.

[16657/1906]

“Sir,—The Lords Commissioners of His Majesty's Treasury have had before them the case of Mr. Edward Day, sorting-clerk and telegraphist, Dublin, which was submitted on the 15th instant, and I am directed by their Lordships to acquaint you that they have been pleased to award him a gratuity of £37 9s. 9d.

“I am, Sir, your obedient servant,

“E. V. Hamilton.

“The Postmaster General.”

Samuels, K.C., and The Hon. Cecil Atkinson, for the Postmaster-General, in support of the motion.

Dudley White, for the plaintiff.

Andrews, J.:—

We have had the question in this case ably and fully argued on both sides, and we do not feel it necessary to reserve our judgment.

By an order made on the 9th November last the plaintiff was appointed receiver by way of equitable execution over so much of a sum of money of between £30 and £40, representing a gratuity under the Act which I shall refer to, as would be sufficient to satisfy the plaintiff's judgment against the defendant. That order was served on the defendant and also on the Secretary of the General Post Office, Dublin, and it does not appear to me to be material that the defendant does not appear to object to the order, as his interests are represented and protected by the Postmaster-General.

The application now before us at the instance of the Postmaster-General to...