|
ΠΑΓΚΥΠΡΙΟΣ ΔΙΚΗΓΟΡΙΚΟΣ ΣΥΛΛΟΓΟΣ
|
|
|
(V7) 1 CLR 65
1907 July 17
[TYSER, C.J.]
THE CYPRUS LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ORDER, 1882,
AND
THE STATUTES OF THE IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND, STYLED, "THE PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS ACT, 1868 AND THE CORRUPT AND ILLEGAL PRACTICES PREVENTION ACTS, 1883 AND 1895."
BETWEEN
CHRISTODOULOS SOZOS,
Petitioner,
AND
SPYROS ARAOUZOS,
Respondent.
ELECTION PETITION-CYPRUS LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ORDER, 1882, ART. 15-COSTS-APPLICATION OF ENGLISH LAW
The adjudication of an election petition includes the adjudication of the cost incidental to it.
The English law and regulations are to be applied in principle "so far as practicable," but in determining the costs to be allowed the taxing officer may take into consideration local circumstances.
This case consisted of applications by both parties to review the taxation of costs in the matter of an election petition, the facts in connection with which are reported on p. 48.
The applications were originally made before the Supreme Court, but the Court decided that they must be heard before the Judge who tried the petition and the case accordingly proceeded before the Chief Justice alone.
The Registrar taxed the costs.
Both parties appealed.
Neoptolemos Pascal for the Respondent to the petition:
The Registrar has proceeded upon a wrong principle. He has apparently considered himself bound by the Cyprus scale. The costs should be taxed according to the English scale, which is higher than that in force in the Cyprus Courts. The English scale allows certain items which the Registrar disallowed altogether, e.g., Instructions for drawing particulars, Fee for drawing particulars, Fee for consultation, Retainer for leader and junior, Instructions for brief, i.e., all the preliminary expenses made after filing the petition and before hearing. See 46 and 47 Vict., C. 51, Sec. 44, Sub-section 3(1) , Rogers, on Election Petition Vol. XI., pp. 712-714.
Theodotou for the Petitioner:
The Cyprus scale of costs applies. Locus regit actionem. The Order in Council says that English law shall apply "so far as practicable." Here its application is not practicable at all, because the profession is not divided into barristers and solicitors. The taxation of costs is not part of the "adjudication." The adjudication is complete upon the delivery of the judgment.
The Registrar explained to the Court that he had based the taxation on the principles of the English scale, and that he had not considered himself bound by the Cyprus scale. He had however, considered himself, entitled to have regard to the Cyprus scale in determining the amounts to be allowed on the various items.
Judgment: CHIEF JUSTICE: By Art. 5 of the Order in Council it is provided that "the Law in force in England for the time being relating to corrupt practices at elections and disputed elections, shall so far as practicable be applied by the Judge to the adjudication of such cases "-that is to say-election petitions.
The adjudication of the cause includes the adjudication of the costs incidental to it.
In the taxation of the costs the English law and regulations are to be applied in principle and "so far as practicable."
Sec. 44 of the English Act of 1883 (which is the material section) does not say that the English High Court scale is to be followed in all particulars. It says that the costs allowed are not to exceed the maximum prescribed by that scale.
The taxing officer, acting on the principles of the English law and regulations and applying that law and those regulations "as far as practicable," has taxed this bill of costs.
I see nothing wrong in his decision.
In considering what amount of costs may be allowed, he may take into consideration the local circumstances. He may look at the Cyprus scale of costs for his guidance, although it does not bind him.
In each instance the taxing officer must be guided by the circumstances of the case.
The appeal and cross appeal are both dismissed. No order as to costs.
Appeal and cross appeal dismissed.