The Gazette 1996

GAZETTE

N E W S

JULY 1996

Report on Council Meeting held on

14 June, 1996

The f o l l ow i ng is a brief summary of

I p r o c e e d i n gs at the me e t i ng of the

Council of the Law S o c i e ty on 14

June, 1996.

1. David R.Pigot

The President paid tribute to the late

David R. Pigot,

a Past President of the

S o c i e t y, wh o wo u ld be greatly mi s s ed

by his c o l l e a g u e s. The Council

ob s e r v ed a minute's silence in his

memo r y.

2. Motion - Lawyer/Client

Privilege

"That this Council r e v i ews the

policy of the S o c i e ty with regard

to lawyer/client privilege

generally and the p owe rs of the

S o c i e ty in particular."

Proposer:

James

MacGuill

Seconder:

Hugh O 'Neill

This motion was adjourned to the

July Council me e t i ng so that a

position paper c ou ld be prepared in

advance of the me e t i ng setting out the

S o c i e t y 's legal p owe rs and its policy

in relation to the s e e k i ng of

information verification from client

f i l es in the course of investigations

by the S o c i e t y 's investigating

accountants.

3. Motion - Recommended Salary

"That this Council proposes that

the r e c omme n d ed salary for a

n ew l y - qu a l i f i ed solicitor shall be

based on a scale of £ 1 5 , 0 00 -

£ 1 8 , 0 0 0 per annum."

Proposer:

Philip

Joyce

Seconder:

Niall

Farrell

The proposer said it w a s s ome t i mes

s u g g e s t ed that salaries for n ew l y-

qualified solicitors should be

determined by market forces but the

perception amo ng n ew l y - qu a l i f i ed

solicitors was that this method wo u ld

not ensure fair play. In recent

me e t i ngs with apprentices on the

Ad v a n c ed Course, disquiet had been

expressed that the current

r e c omme n d ed salary of £ 1 3 , 0 00 had

b e en in place, without revision, for a

number of years. He said that on the

basis of research and discussion a

c o n s e n s us eme r g ed that the basic

figure should be in the region of

! £ 1 5 , 0 00 and he sought, and was

granted by the Council, leave to

amend the figures in his original

motion to the above. The Council then

debated a number of aspects of the

motion including whether a particular

figure should be r e c omme n d ed rather

than a scale, whether a c omm i t t ee of

the S o c i e ty should make the

recommendation rather than the

Council and whether the figures

proposed reflected current realities

in the marketplace. It was agreed that

the Council should g i ve leadership

| in this matter and the motion, in

the a b o ve form, was approved without

a vote.

4. Abrahamson Case

The Chairman of the Education

Comm i t t ee briefed the Council on

d e v e l o pme n ts in the case in wh i ch 811

law undergraduates had brought

judicial review proceedings against

the Society.

| 5. The 'Capping* Issue

The Director General briefed the

Council on indications that the

Deloitte & T o u c he report wo u ld

| r e c omme nd to Minister Rabbitte the

introduction of guidelines to j u d g es

relating to the level of c omp e n s a t i on

awards in person injury actions.

| F o l l ow i ng a discussion, the Council

j e xp r e s s ed satisfaction that the crude

Í 'capping' proposal appears to h a ve

! been d e f l e c t ed and agreed on the

approach wh i ch might be taken by the

S o c i e ty if judicial guidelines we re to

be r e c omme nd e d.

6. Denham Committee Report

| The Director General reported on the

D e n h am Comm i t t ee Report on a

Courts Comm i s s i on wh i ch had been

forwarded to the Minister for Justice

and had been approved by the

Go v e r nme nt in principle. The S o c i e ty

had r e c omme n d ed the establishment

: of a courts service in the paper wh i ch

' the S o c i e ty had produced jointly with

I the Bar Council in 1993. The only

major difference b e t we en that

| r e c omme nd a t i on and the proposals of

the Wo r k i ng Group was in respect of

;

! the c omp o s i t i on of the proposed

j Courts Service Board. The Council

| supported the v i e ws wh i ch had been

í expressed by the President in a

S o c i e ty press release indicating

I disquiet at the fact that it was

proposed the Board wo u ld be

j dominated by the judiciary. It was

remarked with approval that a

professional ma n a g eme nt s y s t em was

required to run the courts e f f e c t i v e ly

and the judiciary should act as j u d g es

and not as administrators. It was

agreed that the proposals represented

a step forward, h owe v e r, although the

key question was whether they wo u ld

ever be implemented. It w a s agreed

also that e v en if the n ew courts

service was established, b a c k l o gs

wo u ld never be significantly reduced

unless court procedures were also

modernised.

7. Draft Amended Bye-laws

The Council spent considerable time on

a detailed examination of the draft

amended By e - l aws of the Society

which were designed to give effect to

specific recommendations of the

Re v i ew Working Group, as approved at

the Special General Meeting on

7 March, 1996. The Policy

! De v e l o pme nt Executive, Ms.

Mary

| Keane,

explained the many

I amendments, in particular the

complicated system required by the

decisions that 50% of the Council retire

annually, that each Council member

175