The Queen v The Mayor, Aldermen, And Burgesses of Sandwich: 1842

A town clerk dismissed from office after stat. 5 and. 6 W. 4, c. 76, applied to the town council for compensation under sect. 66. They resolved, after deliberation,
that, considering the tenure of the office, and other circumstances, his claim was inadmissible, and they disallowed it, reserving to themselves the right of examining into the question of amount if their decision should be over-ruled on appeal. No other determination was come to within six: calendar months of the application. Held that the council had so far determined on such claim within the six months that the claim could not be ‘considered as admitted,’ according to sect. 66, though they had not provisionally fixed the amount of compensation. On appeal to the Lords of the Treasury against a judgment of the town council on a claim of compensation, the Lords have no jurisdiction to enquire into the claimant’s title, but are confined to the question of amount. And this, whether the officer has been dismissed after reappointment, or without having been reappointed, since the passing of the Act. On appeal made after the resolution above stated, the Lords of the Treasury adjudicated on the title, and awarded a less compensation than that demanded ; and the appellant then moved this Court for a mandamus to the council to give a bond for the sum originally demanded, as in case of an admitted claim under sect. 66. The Court, on cause shewn, ordered a mandamus generally requiring the council to award compensation.
[S. C, 2 G. and D.


[1842] EngR 87, (1842) 2 QB 895, (1842) 114 ER 347




England and Wales

Local Government

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.307042