79 / 110
THE GAZETTE
OF THE
fnrcrrgcrmteb 5£afo Sarrcfg af
Vol. VI, No. 8.]
February, 1913.
T FOR CIRCULATION
L AMONGST MEMBERS.
Meetings of the Council.
January 15th.
Debt Collecting Letters.
THREE
letters
issued by non-professional
persons
demanding
payment
of
debts
alleged to be due to third parties, were
referred to the County Courts Committee to
consider what action, if any, should be taken
in reference to them.
Public Roads (Ireland) Act, 1911.
The provisional rules issued under this Act
were submitted. These rules appeared in the
GAZETTE of last month, page 80. The draft
rules provided that for allproceedings from the
drawing of the Civil Bill to the final Order
of the Court, the costs payable by defendant
to plaintiff according to amount recovered,
and by defendant to plaintiff in case of a
dismiss, according to amount claimed, should
be regulated by the following scale :—
When the sum does not exceed
£15
...
...
...
...
£1
0
0
Exceeds £15, but does not exceed
£50
...
...
...
...
2
0
0
Exceeds £50, but does not exceed
£100
...
...
...
3
0
0
Exceeds £100—An additional sum of £1
for every £50 or fractional part of £50
above £100.
At the instance of the Council, the follow
ing scale was substituted :—
When the sum does not exceed
£15
...
...
...
... £100
Exceeds £15, but does not exceed
£30 ...
...
...
...
2
0
0
Exceeds £30, but does not exceed
£50
...
...
...
...300
Exceeds £50—An additional sum of £1
for every £50, or fractional part of £50
above the first £50.
Professional Etiquette.
The opinion of the Council was requested
by a country member as to whether he would
have been justified in acting for the defendant
in Civil Bill proceedings under the following
circumstances :—In September, 1912, a black
smith consulted the member in reference to a
claim against the owner of a machine ;
the
member advised him and was paid for the
advice, and the blacksmith did not return.
Recently the owner of the machine came to
the member and instructed him to defend a
Civil Bill brought by the blacksmith through
another Solicitor on foot of his claim against
the owner of the machine, but having been
previously consulted on the matter by the
blacksmith, the member refused to act for the
defendant.
The Council
expressed
the
opinion that under the circumstances the
member would
have
been
justified
in
defending the Civil Bill, subject to his not
using against his former client information
obtained from him on the subject, and in
support of this opinion the Council referred
to the case of Rakusen
v.
Ellis, Munday and
Clarke (1912), 1 Ch. 831.
Certificates.
Applications by
five
Solicitors
under
Section 47 for renewal of their Certificates
were submitted and were granted.