The Gazette 1989

GAZETTE

APRIL 1989

but by a group of companies so

that it is very difficult to know

which of the companies owns the

goods which are on the premises

which the companies occupy.

In this report the Law Reform

Commission sets out to deal with

the problems presented by these

changes in our habits and com-

mercial practices.

The recommendations centre

around the giving of greater

protection for the Sheriff when he

seizes goods and the limiting of the

time during which a third party can

claim against goods which have

been seized.

It suggests also a right for the

Sheriff to endorse and negotiate

instruments and to surrender and

collect the proceeds of life policies,

which have been taken in

execution.

It is recommended that Sheriffs

be protected where they seize in

good faith property in the joint or

sole possession of the judgement

debtor but that if he seizes goods

in the possession of a third party he

does so at his own risk. This is

alright as far as it goes but would

need to be expanded to cover the

position where goods are seized at

a premises from which several

companies, which are associated,

all carry on business. This is a very

common situation and it is almost

impossible to know who owns the

goods.

The much vexed question of

goods held subject to "retention of

title" has been left over for a later

report.

Useful recommendations are

made to simplify the procedures

relating to the obtaining of

execution orders and that they also

should all have the same legal life.

Interpleader procedure is also to be

simplified and it will be possible to

interplead in the original pro-

ceedings without commencing a

new action.

Sheriffs will welcome the

recommendation that their fees be

increased and index-linked. Fees for

lodgement of execution orders for

example were fixed in 1926, the

usual fee being around 35p, which

in todays money would be around

£10.00.

It is recommended that the

Sheriff should report to the Plaintiff

and the Court in every case within

a specified time. One wonders

what the Court would do with the

large flow of reports that would

arrive. The Commission appear to

be under the impression that

reporting to the Court would in

some way hurry up the execution

of orders. The reality is that, as the

law stands at the moment, orders

are delayed because of the extreme

difficulty in making seizures, which

forces Sheriffs to tread warily and

collect as much money as possible

by instalments. If the making of

seizures were less hazardous there

would be less delays and plaintiffs

and solicitors would have greater

confidence in the system.

This short report - 58 pages -

deals very clearly and concisely

with both the law and practice

relating to Sheriffs with appropriate

references to authorities through-

out.

It is in its own right an excellent

work of reference.

•

Michael Hayes

DEPT. OF JUSTICE

A FAX machine has been

installed in The Administration

Manager's Office in Arás Uí

Dhalaigh.

The facilities are available to all

Court Staff in the Four Courts

complex.

The Fax No. is

(01) 7 2 1 6 20

A DICTIONARY

OF IRISH LAW

Henry Murdoch

"This dictionary provides an

excellent tool in hands of lawyers

both experienced and those less

experienced as well" ... The Hon.

Thomas A. Finlay, Chief Justice,

writing in the forward.

Now Available Post Free Price

IRC25 Paperback - IR£38 Hardback

Direct from the publishers:

TOPAZ PUBLICATIONS

6 4, Upper Georges Street,

Dun Leogheire, Co. Dublin

... or from leading booksellers

CORRESPONDENCE

The Editor,

Law Society Gazette,

Blackhall Place,

Dublin 2.

14th February, 1989.

Re: Shopping Centre Leeses

Dear Sir,

While the relevant law may be

the same for Shopping Centres,

High Street Shops and Office

Blocks, Shopping Centres involve,

as your Members will readily

appreciate, a melange of inter-

relationships which require care-

ful consideration by potential

tenants.

The National Federation of

Shopping Centres was established

to study the problems and make

recommendations and representa-

tions as appropriate. It is

recognised that many of the

problems are of a commercial

nature and not of a legal nature.

A typical example of this is the

'device' whereby a landlord will

admit a new tenant at a high rent

but free of premium in advance of

the general rent review date for the

Centre, in order to establish a

higher market rental value. Service

charges provide another example

as there is a trusteeship situation

here with landlords effectively

spending the money of tenants

without in many instances giving

the tenants any say in how the

money is spent. This is particularly

worrying in relation to the

advertising of Shopping Centres

which benefits landlords indirectly

and has benefits for the tenants

which are difficult to measure.

The Federation does not deal

directly with individual Shopping

Centre tenants but, recognising

that 'the damage is done' when the

lease is signed, has agreed to assist

potential lessees referred by

practising Solicitors.

The telephone number of the

Federation is (01) 611911.

Yours faithfully,

GEORGE EATON, FCA,

Secretary General,

National Federation of Shopping

Centres,

2 Fitzwilliam Place,

Dublin 2.

108