The Gazette 1990

139 / 436

GAZETTE APRIL 1990
In
this
Issue
Striking off the Register and
s. 12 Companies
(Amendment) Act, 1982 125
Lawbrief 134
SADSI News 137
People & Places 138
The Mortgage by deposit
for present and future
advances 141
SYS Joint Conference 145
Book Reviews 149
*
Executive Editor:
Mary Gaynor
Committee:
Eamonn G. Hall, Chairman
Michael V. O'Mahony, Vice-Chairman
John F, Buckley
Gary Byrne
Patrick McMahon
Charles R. M. Meredith
Daire Murphy
John Schutte
Advertising:
Seán Ó hOisín. Telephone: 305236
Fax: 307860
Printing:
Turner's Printing Co. Ltd., Longford.
*
The views expressed in this publication,
save where otherwise indicated, are the
views of the contributors and not
necessarily the views of the Council of
the Society.
The appearance of an advertisement in
this publication does not necessarily
indicate approval by the Society for the
product or service advertised.
Published at Blackhall Place, Dublin 7.
Tel.: 710711. Telex: 31219. Fax: 710704.
A J f t INCORPORATE D
( f | / L | L LAWSOCIETY hH/r I Ir° f m
^ ^ l f l ^ M ^ M I I Vol.84 No.4 May 1!
Viewpoint
The proposal emanating from Mr.
Desmond O'Malley, Minister for
Industry and Commerce, of a
Tribunal to assess compensation
for motor accident claims seems,
with great respect, not to have
been fully thought out. The in-
surance companies having per-
suaded the present Government's
predecessor that the abolition of
juries in personal injury actions
would significantly reduce the level
of awards to plaintiffs have been
proved wrong, to the surprise of
few in the legal profession. Some
insurance offices apparently per-
suaded by their own arguments
aggressively sought additional
motor business and have appar-
ently suffered severe losses as a
result of the allegedly high awards.
The Minister by now should
surely be persuaded that it is
accepted in our culture that victims
of accidents, whether in motor or
industrial accidents, are entitled to
a more generous level of com-
pensation than might be available
in some, though certainly not all,
other jurisdictions. Such awards
have been made by juries and now
by judges, the large percentage of
the former and all of the latter are
presumably payers of motor
insurance premiums and therefore
the ultimate bearers of the load.
There are of course, serious
defects in the present system, the
most obvious being the large
number of uninsured drivers. It is
unfair on the insurance companies
that they have, through the Motor
Insurers Bureau, the obligation to
pay for the effects of the problems
caused by these uninsured drivers.
If the Government wants to get
insurance premiums down, then it
must take all steps to ensure that
the level of uninsured drivers is
reduced to as near nil as is feasible.
It is also clear that our level of
road accidents is intolerably high.
Road discipline is, particularly in
urban areas, most noticeable by its
absence. There seems to be very
little enforcement of traffic laws;
one particularly dangerous practice
rampant in our urban areas is the
"crashing" of traffic lights. A
serious effort should be made to
enforce our traffic laws. If it is
possible to assemble large numbers
of Gardai for security duties on the
occasion of international meetings
in Dublin Castle then might it not
be possible to arrange to devote the
attention of those Gardai on other
days to the enforcement of our
traffic laws?
It should be borne in mind, if
comparison is to be made with the
Stardust Tribunal, that that ex-
cellent body was created to assess
levels of compensation where there
was no doubt that the plaintiffs
would have succeeded in civil
actions but where grave doubts
existed about the availability of
funds to compensate them. Is Mr.
O'Malley proposing strict liability
for motor accidents with the State
compensating the victims? If not,
then perhaps he should think again
about suggesting a tribunal as an
alternative to our courts. He might
also ponder whether such a tri-
bunal might not be unconstitu-
tional. •
123