Treacy v Corcoran

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 31 January 1874
• Date: 31 January 1874
• Court: Supreme Court

Com. Pleas.

TREACY

and

CORCORAN.

Jones v. Carter 8 Q. B. 134.

Stephens v. BadcockENR 3 B. & Ad. 354.

Baron v. HusbandENR 4 B. & Ad. 611.

Barlow v. BrowneENR 16 M. & W. 126.

Cobb v. Becke 6 Q. B. 930.

Lowndes v. Earl of Stamford 18 Q. B. 425, 439.

Jones v. Carter 8 Q. B. 134.

Stephens v. BadcockENR 3 B. & Ad. 354.

Cobb v. Becke 6 Q. B. 930.

King v. Alston 12 Q. B. 971.

Roberts v. AultonENR 2 H. & N. 432; 26 L. J. Ex. N. S. 380.

The Queen v. The Lords Commissioners of the Treasury 16 Q. B. 362, per Lord Campbell, C. J.

Roberts v. AultonENR 2 H. & N. 432; 26 L. J. Ex. N. S. 380.

Lowndes v. Earl of Stamford 18 Q. B. 425.

— 6 & 7 Wm. 4, c. 116, s. 110 — Salary of Clerk of the Crown.

40 THE IRISH REPORTS. R. TREACY v. CORCORAN. The Apportionment Act, 1870 (33 (5, 34 Vict. c. 35)-6 (5. 7 Wm. 4, c. 116, s. 110-Salary of Clerk of the Crown. The Plaintiff, who had resigned the office of Clerk of the„Crown in the middle of a half year, held entitled to recover from his successor, the DefendÂant-as money had and received-an apportioned part of that half year's salary which had been paid to the Defendant. ACTION, to recover a sum of £115 claimed by the Plaintiff as an apportioned part of the salary of the Clerk of the Crown for the Queen's County received by his successor, the Defendant. The Plaint contained counts for money had and received, and on an account stated. The defences were traverses of the causes of action, and the case was tried before the Lord Chief Justice at the Kildare Summer Assizes of 1873. The facts, which were not disputed, were set out in the following consent, dated 27th July, 1872 :- " It is hereby consented to and agreed upon that the following several matÂters of fact shall be admitted at the trial of the issue in this suit on behalf of the Plaintiff as if proved, and with the same force and effect as if proved in the ordinary way, viz.-1. that the Plaintiff, by letter dated the 8th day of April, 1872, tendered his resignation of the office of Clerk of the Crown for the Queen's County, and that said resignation was accepted by letter from the proper authorities, dated the 13th of April in the same year: 2. that the Defendant was appointed Clerk of the Crown for the Queen's County on the 21st day of April, 1872: 3. that the said Defendant, on the 24th of July, 1872, received from and was paid by R. C. Hamilton, Esq., the Treasurer of the Queen's County, the sum of £115 sterling on a presentment made at the Summer Assizes,1872, for the half year's salary of the Clerk of the Crown for said county to the said Summer Assizes, 1872." Walker, Q. C., for the Plaintiff, contended that the salary of the Clerk of the Crown was apportionable under " The ApportionÂment Act, 1870," (33 & 34 Vict. c. 35), that the Plaintiff was entitled to recover the sum of £50 3s. 3d. as an apportioned part of the £115 from the 10th March (1) to the 24th July, 1872 (2), (1) The date of the last presentment (2) The date of the presentment at at the Spring Assizes. the Summer Assizes. VOL. VIII.] COMMON LAW SERIES. 41 or if not to the sum of £35 2s. 3d. as a proportion of six months' Cosa. Pleas. salary, and that the least sum the Plaintiff could recover was 1874. £21 8s. 6d. THE 9CY The question was reserved for the...