The Express.
London, England, 1862-11-25 00:00:00

LAW INTELLIGMCE.

(THIS DAY.)

COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.

Sitting in Banco.—(l3efan Lard Chief Justice Cockburn,
and Justices Wighkaan, Blackburn, and Mellor.)

This was the last, day of term. The nisi pries after•term
'Minis commence to-morrow (Wednesday).

Pal LONDON DOCK CONPIINT V. TI9C PAZUSH OP NHADWILL.

In this cue • rule had beenTibtained7calling
upon the parish of Shadwell to show cause why
an award made between the pariah and the London
Dock Company relative to the rating of the latter should
not,be set aside on the ground that it did not dispose of the
appeal ; and secondly, that the principle upon which the
award was made was wrong in law. The company having
been rated to the poor in the sum of 30,0001., ap-
pealed, and the matter was referred to arbitrators, with
an umpire. The award reduced the value to 26,3001.,
and the company being dissatisfied with it, wrote
to the umpire to state the principles upon which he had
made the award, with • view of impeaching it if wrong in
law. The umpire replied to that letter, by stating that be
had fixed the value of the rent which might be obtained
from a tenant from year to year, first fixing the value of
the whole docks, and then dividing the value among the
different parishes according to the area.
Mr. Leah, Q.C., and Mr. Poland, showed caused against
UN role ; Mr. Bovill, Q.C., and Mr. Murphy, sup-
ported it.
Mr. Lush said there was no necessity for this application
to the court. In the submission the arbitrator had power
to state a case for the opinion of the court on the appli-
cation of either party, but neither had taken advan-
tage of it, and it was only after the award
was made that a letter was written to the
umpire which produced the answer complained of. With
regard to the statement made on the moving of the rule
that by. this award the parish had received no much money
from the docks that it was unnecessary to rate the other
parishioner', it was but right to state that in consequence
of this dispute the pariah was obliged to borrow money at
6 per cent., and that now having received money from the
compare, they had thought it right to pay off the arrears
and relieve the parish as much as poesible.
The Lord Cluef Justice said that possibly the umpire
had been mistaken in what he had done. It was • matter
of doubt, and be thought the court could not decide in the
company's favour on the materials before them. All the
court could be eked to do was, to send the award back—•
power which the parties had under the submission, but
never availed themselves of, and he thought the court
ought not to encourage parties lying by until after the
award was given, and then Ask the court to replace them
in their former position.
After hearing Mr. Bovill in rapport of the rule,
The court discharged the rule, with coats.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER.
Sittings in Banco in Michaelmas Term.—(Before Lord Chief
Baron Pollock, and Barons Martin, Bramwell, and
Chian.U.)

MAITLAND y. MACKINNON.

This was a case argued a few days ago in which the quer
tion was whether certain stables attached to a house in
Cumberland-place passed to the defendant under a lease
of the house granted to him many years ago.
The court now delivered judgment in favour of the de-
fendant.

COURT OF PROBATE AND DIVORCE.
(Before the Judge Ordinary.)