238 / 432
GAZETTE
N E W S
JUNE 1994
L i c e n s i ng D i f f i c u l t i es D i s c u s s ed w i t h D e p a r t m e n t
Two members of the Law Society met
recently with officials at the
Department of Justice about the need
to ensure the primacy of District Court
records concerning seven-day licences
and hotel licences. Currently, there is
no difference on the face of the two
licences which makes it difficult to
differentiate them. The Law Society
representatives pointed out that
inaccuracies on the licensing register
were posing problems for members of
the profession and exposing them to
the risk of negligence claims. They
made the point that a person should be
entitled to rely on District Court
records and to obtain a certificate as
to what was shown in the licensing
register. It was vitally important that
every licensee knew exactly what type
of licence he possessed.
The Society's representatives,
Tom
Shaw
and
Maeve Hayes,
informed the
Department that the Solicitors Mutual
Defence Fund had become aware of
250 licences that were not in order for
some reason, or were a different type
of licence to that shown on the
District Court register. This had led to
a number of negligence cases arising
from circumstances whefe solicitors
had certified title on the basis of an
entry on the District Court register
and subsequently the entry on the
register was found to be incorrect.
They argued that it was unfair and
unreasonable that solicitors were
being exposed to negligence claims in
this manner.
They suggested that the solution to the
problem would be to enact an
"amnesty" provision in legislation to
the effect that where a person could
show that he had been engaged in
trading in accordance with the terms
of the licence as shown on the District
Court register, he would be deemed to
have that particular type of licence.
Department of Justice officials said
that it was unlikely that such a
provision would be enacted in
isolation without a full and detailed
examination of the entire licensing
law. Reform of the licensing laws was
not included irt the Programme for
Government and, therefore, would not
be undertaken in the near future. The
officials accepted, however, that the
licensing register should be accurate
and undertook to discuss with their
colleagues in the Department how the
position could be improved.
The Law Society representatives
suggested that the licensing register
should be accorded the same status as
a folio in the Land Registry so that it
could be regarded by all parties as an
absolute document.
•
M i n i s t e r V o t e s N o C o n f i d e n ce i n
t h e J u d i c i a l S y s t em - L a w S o c i e t y
In a recent press statement, the Law
Society said that the Minister of
Commerce and Technology's proposal
to limit compensation awards in
personal injury cases amounted to "a
vote of no confidence in one of the
most fundamental aspects of the entire
legal system - the adjudication by
judges, who are independent under the
Constitution, of the amount of
compensation a person should get
when he/she suffers personal injury
through no fault of their own."
The statement, issued on June 9, noted
that the Minister was considering
establishing on a statutory footing a
medical panel to examine injuries and
awards on a continuing basis. "Such a
proposal could have the most serious
and far reaching implications for the
administration of justice, as
established under the Constitution, and
the Minister should now explain in
detail precisely what function such a
panel of doctors would have. Is the
Minister proposing that judges should
be replaced by a panel of doctors?,"
the statement enquired. "Almost
certainly, such a proposal would be
unconstitutional."
The statement also criticised the
Minister for his failure to unveil the
detail of his proposals, or even to
produce a discussion document,
although it was now more than twelve
months since he had announced his
intention to introduce legislation to
cap compensation awards. "He has,
therefore, been recycling the basic idea
- one that, on the face of it, is bound
to be popular with the motoring public
- without producing the necessary
follow-up." The statement continued:
"The Minister is advocating an
approach which is radical - even
Draconian - and it is incumbent on
him to produce coherent developed
proposals so that the Irish public can
judge for themselves precisely how
their rights are going to be curtailed,
allegedly in the interest of securing
reduced insurance costs."
D
L a w D i r e c t o r y 1 9 9 4
- C o r r e c t i on
Users of the 1994 Law Directory are
requested to note that on page 287 of
the directory under the entry for
CUSSEN, ROBERT & SON, an
incorrect telephone number is
published for the branch office of
Cussen, Michael & Co, at Rathkeale.
The correct number is 069 64003.
D
C o r r e c t i o n
I Readers are asked to note a correction
to the article
Are Your Books in
Order???
published on page 173 of
the June edition of the
Gazette
(Vol.
85 no. 5). The penultimate paragraph
on page 173 should read:
In addition all office account
transactions must be recorded in a
cash book and ledger, (Regulation
| 10(2)(b)).
and not Regulation 10(2)(6) as
incorrectly printed.
•
214