British Farina Mills (Law Costs).

Oral Answers to Questions — Ex-Service Men. – in the House of Commons on 2nd March 1922.

Alert me about debates like this

Captain COOTE:

53.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the law costs of the defendants in the recent action of R. E. Pratt, Limited, versus the British Farina Mills, were borne by the Crown; and, if so, what is the amount of the charge falling on the taxpayer?

Photo of Sir William Mitchell-Thomson Sir William Mitchell-Thomson , Glasgow Maryhill

I have been asked to reply. The answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. The second part does not, therefore, arise.

Captain COOTE:

How is it that a bankrupt company in liquidation can afford the very heavy costs, and the engaging of expensive counsel?

Photo of Sir William Mitchell-Thomson Sir William Mitchell-Thomson , Glasgow Maryhill

The charges are paid by the liquidator.

Captain COOTE:

54.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that, in the recent action of R. E. Pratt, Limited, versus the British Farina Mills, judgment was given for the plaintiff for £4,500 and costs, and that the defendants' solicitors have now stated that there is no chance of this sum or of the costs being paid; whether the Government, as debenture holders in the British Farina Mills, admit their liability under this judgment; and, if so, how they propose to discharge it?

Photo of Sir William Mitchell-Thomson Sir William Mitchell-Thomson , Glasgow Maryhill

I have been asked to reply. I am aware of the decision in this action, but I have no information as to the statement referred to. The answer to the second part of the question is in the negative; the third part does not, therefore, arise.