The Gazette 1994

GAZETTE

L A W

B R I E

W H

APRIL 1994

>|jV" ' !!'

i l l » M l ! )

L A

By Dr. Eamonn G. Hall, Solicitor

Family Law Bill, 1994

The Family Law Bill, 1994

sponsored

by the Minster for Equality and Law,

Reform, became available in late

February 1994.

The main objects of the Bill are to

enable the court to make financial,

property and other ancillary orders

following the granting of a decree of

nullity of marriage and in cases where

foreign decrees of divorce, nullity and

legal separation are entitled to recog-

nition in the State; to give the Circuit

Court jurisdiction in respect of nullity

proceedings; to restate the law, with

amendments, on the powers of the court

to make declarations in relation to the

status of a person's marriage; to raise

the minimum age for marriage to 18;

provide for notice of marriage and to

strengthen the general law on

maintenance.

The Bill implements many of the

proposals contained in the

White Paper

on Marital Breakdown

(September,

1992 PI. 9104). It takes into account

recommendations contained in

The Law

of Nullity in Ireland

published by the

Office of the Attorney General in 1976;

and it takes into account

recommendations contained in the

following reports of the Law Reform

Commission -

Report on the Age of

Majority, the Age for Marriage and

some Connected Subjects

(LRC 5-

1983);

Report on Jactitation of

Marriage and Declarations of Status

(LRC 6-1983);

Report on Jurisdiction

in Proceedings for Nullity of Marriage,

Recognition of Foreign Nullity Decrees

and the Hague Convention on the

Celebration and Recognition of the

Validity of Marriages

(LRC 20-1985);

Report of the Oireachtas Joint

Committee on Marital Breakdown

(PI.

3074) and the

Report of the Combat

Poverty Agency on the Financial

Consequences of Marital Breakdown.

Reference

1. Government Publications Sale Office, Sun

Alliance House, Molesworth Street, Dublin

2, IRP3.20 plus IRP0.72p postage.

Feminine Gender to include

Masculine Gender

The Interpretation (Amendment) Act,

1993,

(No. 35 of 1993) provides that

in every Act of the Oireachtas passed

on or after December 22, 1993 and in

every instrument made wholly or

partly under any such Act, every word

importing the feminine gender shall,

unless the contrary intention appears,

be construed as if it also imports the

masculine gender.

The 1993 Act is intended to facilitate

the drafting of Bills and statutory

instruments in the feminine gender

where appropriate.

The Interpretation Act, 1937

and the

1993 Act are to be construed as one

and may be cited together as

the

Interpretation Acts, 1937 and 1993.

Court Dress

US Justice Jerome Frank noted in

The

Cult of the Robe

(1945) that judicial

robes symbolised the notion that

courts must preserve the ancient ways;

that the past is sacred and change,

impious. According to this notion,

what has heretofore been done must be

right; improvements and experi-

mentation in novelties are always

unwise; the populace must never

profanely seek to modify inherited

customs and institutions. He noted that

"robe-ism" is still too much with us.

Readers will recall that late last year

the Lord Chancellor, Lord Mackay of

Clashfern and the Lord Chief Justice

of England and Wales, Lord Taylor,

announced that in the light of

responses to their 1992 consultation

paper on court dress, no changes

would be made to the current code.

Responses to the studies from jurors,

witnesses and members of the public

as well as from the legal profession

and the judiciary revealed strong

support for maintaining the status quo.

The majority of those in favour of

retaining court dress felt that formal

dress had a significant role to play in

maintaining respect for the authority

and status of the court. Similarly, there

was little support for changes to the

wearing of formal dress on ceremonial

occasions when robes were seen as

marks of the importance of tradition.

Justice Jerome Frank noted that

judicial robes symbolised the notion

that what has heretofore been done

must be right; improvements and

experimentation in novelties are

always unwise; the populace must

never profanely seek to modify

inherited customs and institutions;

"robe-ism" is still too much with us.

The Bar Council of Ireland is in the

process of drafting a report which

deals with court dress but has not yet

finalised its deliberations.

Those who oppose wigs and gowns for

the judiciary may be comforted by the

fact that court dress for the Irish

judiciary is sober in comparison with

the court dress of judges in our

neighbouring island. There is certainly

merit in retention of the judicial gown

and the gown for advocate lawyers;

the wig is another matter.

Those readers who consider that

judicial dress in Ireland never changed

with the revolution in 1922 may be

interested in details of the ceremonial

court dress or daily court dress which

judges use in England and Wales.

A High Court judge in ceremonial

dress wears knee breeches, hose and

buckled shoes and bands worn in

winter, beneath a scarlet cloth and fur

mantle, and a full bottomed wig. A