934 THE ADVOCATE
VOL. 78 PART 6 NOVEMBER 2020
In some circumstances the situation can be dealt with, without a reading
of the case concerned, along these lines.
Judge: Mr. Peskett, I shall expect you to deal, in your argument, with
International Herring Industries against Noze. Lord Firebrace’s speech.
Peskett (without any idea what he’s talking about, playing for time):
Your Lordship has in mind the speech of Lord Firebrace in The International
Herring Industries case?
Judge: That’s what I said.
Peskett: But, as your Lordship no doubt realizes, that case dealt with a
very different set of circumstances.
Judge: Did it?
Peskett: And was decided before Troxie Cinema and the Irish Artists Union
ex parte Pompadour of which decision I’m sure I needn’t remind your Lordship.
Judge (hastily): No. I don’t think you need.
Peskett: In Troxie’s Case I believe a certain doubt was cast on the reasoning
of Lord Firebrace.
Judge: Lord Firebrace was extinguished!
Peskett (laughing heartily): Your Lordship coins a phrase. And Troxie
Cinema has been five times granted the mead of approval of the Privy Council.
The five cases are rather long, my Lord, and deal with complex matters
of Indian law, but I will have them sent for...
Judge: No, Mr. Peskett. I don’t think that will be necessary.
Peskett: Your Lordship has them well in mind?
Judge: As well in mind as you have, Mr. Peskett. (Counsel and Judge
regard each other with the steady look of poker players who both hold
hands full of twos and threes and finally the Judge breaks the tension by
Judge: Mr. Peskett. Do I gather it to be your submission that this is a case
which depends entirely on questions of fact?
Peskett: Your Lordship has put my submission, of course, far more neatly
than I could.
Judge: I just wanted to see what, if anything, was in your mind.
(Loud laughter in court in which Peskett joins dutifully.)
Judge: Very well, Mr. Peskett. I’m bound to agree with you. This case
doesn’t really come within Lord Firebrace’s well-known dicta.
Peskett: I think not, my Lord.
You see? A danger neatly avoided on both sides.
Finally, lest it be said that a solicitor’s practice does not have its jocular
moments, W. Grant Hughes of Richmond has passed along the following