The appellant may appeal in formâ pauperis, and the respondent in a proper case may defend the appeal in formâ pauperis (Handford v. George Clarke, Limited (c)).

It is necessary for such person to show that he is "not worth £25," his wearing apparel and the subject-matter of the cause only excepted: R. S. C., O. 16, r. 22. See Kydd v. The Watch Committee of the City of Liverpool (d), also Smith v. Atkins (e).

For procedure see R. S. C., O. 16, rr. 23—32. If a party has been admitted to sue or defend as a pauper the order carries him through all subsequent stages in the Supreme Court, and he can appeal to the Court of Appeal without giving security for the costs of appeal. But this is not so as to an appeal to the House of Lords (Drennan v. Andrew (ƒ)).

Irish Decision. The Court of Appeal in Ireland apparently does not order security for the costs of an appeal upon the ground alone of poverty (Stormont v. Workman (g)).

Procedure after Appeal heard.-When the Court of Appeal has given judgment on any appeal, any party may deposit the order with the registrar of the county court, who is to file it and send a copy to the judge. It is then to have the same effect as a decision of the judge (W. C. R. 72 (1) ).

If the order amounts to an award or decision in favour of any party it is to be served, recorded and proceeded on as if it had been an award or decision of the judge (ib. (2)).

If the effect of the order is that an award, decision or order be made in favour of any party the judge shall give effect to such order (ib. (3) ).

(c) [1907] 1 K. B. 181; 76 L. J. K. B. 76; 96 L. T. 175; 23 T. L. R. 127.

(d) 24 T. L. R. 257. (f) L. R. 1 Ch. 300.

(e) 78 L. J. Ch. 307.
(g) 33 Ir. L. R. 165.

Generally the judge shall make such award, or give such decision, and direct and take such proceedings as may be necessary to carry out and give effect to the order made by the Court of Appeal (ib. (5)).

If the order directs or involves a re-hearing or further hearing the judge shall as soon as convenient, appoint a day and hour for the re-hearing or further hearing, and the registrar has to give notice to the parties.

The appellate court may always remit the award to the arbitrator for further consideration, or order the arbitrator to state a case on a question or questions raised in the arbitration. See Glasgow and South Western Railway v. Laidlaw (h); Rae v. Fraser (i); Hobbs v. Bradley (k); Caledon Shipbuilding Co. v. Kennedy (1).

As to costs when case is remitted, see Murin v. Calderwood (m).

Appeal to the House of Lords.-An appeal now lies to the House of Lords from the decision of the Court of Appeal in England, the Court of Session in Scotland, and the Court of Appeal in Ireland.

The appeal in England which existed under the Act of 1897 is given by the Appellate Jurisdiction Act, 1876 (n), s. 3 of which enacts that " subject as in this Act mentioned an appeal shall lie to the House of Lords from any order or judgment of any of the Courts following; that is to say, (1) of her Majesty's Court of Appeal in England. . .'

It was decided under the Act of 1897, in the case of McKinnon (or Osborn) v. Barclay Curle & Co (o), that no

(h) 2 F. 708; 37 Sc. L. R. 503.

(i) 1 F. 1017.

(k) 2 F. 744; 37 Sc. L. K. 532.

(2) 8 F. 597.

(m) 1 F. 634.

(n) 39 & 40 Vict. c. 59.

(0) [1901] A. C. 269; 3 F. (H. of L.) 1; 38 Sc. L. R. 611.

appeal would lie from the Court of Session in Scotland to the House of Lords in a workman's compensation case. This decision turned on the words of the Act of 1897, Sched. 2 (14). An appeal is in terms given by Sched. 2 (17) (b) of the present Act.

In Ireland an appeal to the House of Lords from the Court of Appeal is in terms given by s. 18 of Sched. 2.

Upon an appeal to the House of Lords security for costs is required unless the appellant can obtain permission from a committee of the House to prosecute the appeal in formâ pauperis.

APPENDIX

APPENDIX A.

EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY ACT, 1880.

(43 & 44 VICT. Cap. 42.)

An Act to extend and regulate the Liability of Employers to make Compensation for Personal Injuries suffered by Workmen in their service (a). [7th September, 1880.]

BE it enacted by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:

1. Where after the commencement of this Act personal Amendment injury is caused to a workman (b)

(1.) By reason of any defect in the condition of the ways,
works, machinery, or plant (c) connected with or
used in the business of the employer (d); or
(2.) By reason of the negligence of any person in the
service of the employer who has any superinten-
dence entrusted to him whilst in the exercise of such
superintendence (e); or

(3.) By reason of the negligence of any person in the
service of the employer to whose orders or direc-
tions (f) the workman at the time of the injury
was bound to conform, and did conform, where
such injury resulted from his having so con-
formed (g); or

(4.) By reason of the act or omission of any person in the service of the employer, done or made in obedience

to the rules or byelaws of the employer, or in

(a) Scope and effect of Act, pp. 39-42.

(b) "Workman," who is, see s. 10 of Employers and Workmen Act, 1875; seaman is not "workman," pp. 64-73.

(c) See pp. 105-130.

(d) Ante, pp. 113-115; "employer," who is, pp. 74-84. (e) Exercise of superintendence, pp. 130–136.

(f) Ante, pp. 136-145.

(g) Snowdon v. Baynes, ante, p. 145; Wild v. Waygood, ante, p. 146.

of law.