169 / 244
GAZETTE
SEPTEMBER 1979
Correspondence
22 Lower Baggot Street,
Dublin 2.
Re: Hotel Licences
Dear Sir,
I wonder if you would bring to the attention of the
profession, through the Gazette, the inherent dangers in
accepting a licence attached to a hotel premises without
proper investigation as to whether it is, in fact, an hotel or
an ordinary 7-day Publican's licence.
On the face of it a licence is stated to be "Publican's
Licence (Ordinary)" with a caveat on the back of the
licence to the effect that the form in respect of both an
hotel and a seven-day ordinary Publican's Licence are the
same but that there are certain restrictions attached to a
"Hotel Licence" which do not attach to a seven-day
Publican's Licence.
It seems to me that there are some solicitors, most
auctioneers and practically all holders of hotel licences
under the impression that they have got a 7-day
Publican's licence.
Where a "Hotel Premises" are being sold then it is
incumbent upon both the solicitor for the Purchaser and
Vendor to check in the District Court Licensing Office as
to whether the licence is an hotel licence or otherwise.
If it is an hotel licence, that has been enlarged under
Section 19 of the 1960 Act then prospective purchasers
should ascertain the following:—
Was the original "Dispense" licence under Section 2 of
the 1902 Act granted prior to the passing of the 1960
Act, and if so:—
1. Does the premises have the necessary rooms
qualifications i.e. at least 10 apartments, or if
situate in a County Borough, including the
Dublin Metropolitan District, 20 apartments.
2. That the premises are registered in the register of
hotels kept by Bord Failte Eireann.
The Dublin Metropolitan Licensing District Court has
adopted the practice of forwarding to Bord Fáilte a list of
premises that should be registered with them under
Section 20 of the 1960 Licensing Act.
Failure to be so registered in the Register of Hotels
disentitles renewal of the licence.
Yours sincerely,
Frank O'Donnell.
Probate Office,
Four Courts,
Re: Loss of Wills
Dublin 7.
Dear Sir,
I have been directed by the Probate Judge to write to
you to express his concern about the growing number of
original Wills which are being lost, necessitating
applications to Court to prove such Wills in terms of a
copy or of a reconstructed copy.
In the calendar year 1978 there were eleven
applications to the High Court to prove Wills or Codicils
in terms of a copy, where the originals had been lost.
In the Calendar year 1979, up to and including 30th
July, there have been a further thirteen such applications.
A breakdown of the 1978 applications shows that one
Will was lost when a house was burgled, three were lost in
the post (one being lost while being transmitted by
ordinary unregistered post from a Solicitor to his town
agent) and the remaining seven were lost in Solicitor's
offices.
A breakdown of the 1979 applications shows that one
Will was lost when the Executor threw it into his waste
paper basket, one was alleged to have been destroyed in a
fire in a Solicitor's Office, one was lost either by
T
the
Solicitor acting or his town agent, one was alleged to have
been posted by a Solicitor to a client who couldn't recall
receiving it, one application arose out of the loss of two
Codicils given by a Solicitor to the Testator while the
other eight applications arose out of the loss of Wills in
Solicitor's offices.
His Lordship asked me to point out that a significant
feature in these cases was the inadequacy of the
information about the efforts to trace such Wills or about
the circumstances leading to the loss of the Wills in the
first instance. He feels that the facts, as revealed above,
particularly as regards the loss of Wills in Solicitor's
offices, should be a cause of concern to your society and
to Solicitors generally.
He would be grateful if you would draw the attention
of your members to this problem as discreetly as possible.
Your Council might also consider giving some guidance
in the Matter.
Yours truly,
Ide Cleir,
Probate Officer.
Security Pacific Plaza,
1200 Third Avenue, Suite 1200,
San Diego, California 92101,
(714) 239-3357.
Dear Sirs:
Having been totally inspired by a recent four-month
trip through Europe, and having recently completed
fifteen years of successful practice as an attorney, I have
decided to close my San Diego law office and return to
Europe to reside.
Although I could live off investments for a while, I am
instead seeking out new challenges and opportunities (in
no way limited to law). Perhaps I will find myself involved
in management, writing, teaching, journalism, or music.
A little background: basically a hard charging trial
attorney; single; age 39; named San Diego Trial Lawyer
of the Month by San Diego Trial Lawyer's Association;
Superior Court Judge pro tern; Republican nominee for
California State Assembly; successful real estate investor;
professional musician (trombone, piano, guitar); song
writer (Ed Sullivan TV Show); Pomona College, 1961
(BA in Economics); UCLA Law School, 1964(LLB/JD);
Admitted California Bar 1965; Lieutenant U.S. Navy
(Law Specialist) 1965-1968; editor of political
newspaper; Professor of Law; School Board President;
Library Trustee; Director, San Diego Public Defender;
Listed in Who's Who in American Law; Board of
Directors, Starlight Opera; Arbitrator, San Diego County
Bar Association.
Please advise me immediately as to positions available.
If you have nothing available, please provide
recommendations or suggestions, or refer this letter
directly to someone who might be able to assist me.
Very truly yours,
Philip N. Andreen.
Attorney at Law
171