The Gazette 1972

Adjournment Dail Debate on High

Court Offices, December 15th, 1971

Mr. T. J. Fitzpatrick (Cavan): At Question Time

today I tabled the following question : To ask the

Minister for Justice if he is aware that due to the inter-

ference by his Department in the day to day running of

the Taxing Masters' offices in the Four Courts without

any consultation with the Taxing Masters, the work of

these offices has been completely disrupted and is at a

standstill with consequent inconvenience to the legal

pofession and general public; if he will take steps to

ensure that proper provision is made for the smooth

running of these offices; and if he will make a statement

nil the matter.

I regret to say that I consider the reply of the Minister

for Justice to be unsatisfactory. I did feel that the

Miniter was apologetically standing over a state of

affairs which he did not believe he could justify.

I raise this matter on the adjournment because I

he] ieve there is a considerable principle involved. We

have here an example of the Executive, the Government

ui this country, adopting what I consider to he a very

high-handed and arrogant attitude to a judicial or

quasi-judicial officer or officers, and I think it is clear

that unless we have a reasonably harmonious approach

from the Executive to the judicial or quasi-judicial offi-

cers, indeed to all parts of the administration under the

various Departments, we will have nothing but chaos.

One of the oldest offices in the High Court is that of

1 axing Master. I believe it has existed for approximately

100 years. There are two Taxing Masters. They perform

Miat, in my opinion, is a judicial, certainly a quasi-

judicial, function. They should he independent; they

should not he interfered with; the dignity of their officc

should he upheld.

Although it is not directly related to this question

there is the position of Master of the High Court,

another office of a judicial nature second only to that of

a judge of the High Court, and according to reliable

^formation which I have before me and which I intend

to put on the record of the House, and defy the Minister

tp contradict it—if he does I will ask him to substan-

t'ate his contradiction—the present Master of the High

Gourt will have concluded his term of office in a short

t uie I am informed that on 29th October last,

°fficers from the Department of Justice, approached

Master of the High Court and asked him to

acate his court, to hand over the court for use for other

Purposes. Having considered the matter, the Master of

the High Court decided that, having occupied that

°urt and having discharged his duties therefrom for

Pproximately twenty vears, he would not vacate the

?°urt until his term of office had expired, and he so

^formed the officers.

He thought that was the end of the matter, hut in the

pace of three or four days he received a letter over the

Written signature of

the Minister

for

Justice,

thanking him for his co-operation and for his

^reement to vacate his court in favour of another

Judge to he appointed. The Master of the High Court

as utterly amazed, and, it having been brought to his

Uotice when he was requested to vacate his office that it

*as proposed to abolish the office of Master of the High

Gourt and to hand over the functions of that office to

the Taxing Masters to he discharged by them, he learned

from the Faxing Masters that an approach had been

made to them to accept the functions of the Master of

the High Court, which, of course, was absolutely absurd

because there is as great a difference between chalk and

cheese as between the functions of the Master of the

High Court and the Taxing Masters.

The Taxing Masters informed those officers who

approached them that they were not interested in the

proposal, that it was flatly in contradiction or contrary

to the terms of their appointments and that they had

no intention of assuming the duties of the Master of the

High Court which they considered themselves entirely

unsuited to perform. That was thought to he the end of

it, hut on 2nd November the Taxing Masters received a

letter dealing with the interview which I have just

related and which occurred on 1st November. The letter

stated that there had been a change of thought about

the matter and that it was not now proposed to proceed

with the change or with the proposal to abolish the

office of Master of the High Court.

Subsequently a letter was received stating that it was

proposed to make certain changes, that though it was

not proposed to abolish the office of Master of the High

Court, the following changes would be made : the Mas-

ter of the High Court would transfer his office to the

Senior Taxing Master's office; the Senior Taxing Mas-

ter would go to the office of the Junior Taxing Master

and the Junior Taxing Master would transfer his office

to a conference room 240 yards away. It was stated also

that it was proposed to effect these changes as from

22nd November.

On 4th November the 'Faxing Masters replied stating

they did not accept the proposed changes. On 9th

November the most senior officer in the Department of

Justice consulted the Taxing Masters regarding accom-

modation and there was a discussion between the most

senior officer in the Department and the Taxing Masters,

and the Taxing Masters made it clear they did not pro-

pose to transfer or to accept the alternative accommo-

dation because it was not suitable. I wish to emphasise

that they made that perfectly clear in their letter and

made it perfectly clear to the Secretary of the Depart-

ment on 9th November.

At that discussion, the matter was left in mid-air—

there was no decision on it, no arrangement come to—

and the Secretary of the Department left on the note

that he would think about the matter.

Nothing further was heard by either of the Taxing

Masters until they reported for duty on 22nd November

which I think was a Monday. The senior Taxing Master

found that the lock on the main door of his office had

been changed and that his key would not fit it. He went

around to another door which leads to his office and

found that it was very crudely, as I said earlier, hut

permanentlv barricaded, by having a crude piece of

wood nailed upon it so that he could not get into it,

and it is very significant to note that there were two

other doors—artificial or ornamental doors at the Tax-

ing Master's office which were not doors at all but

which were there really only for ornamental purposes—

and so determined were these officers of the Minister in

117