192 / 216
for some time, and has given you a detailed
account of the activities of this Council during
the past year.
With your permission, I desire to refer to certain
matters set out therein. For some time past, we
have constantly been receiving complaints from
members about serious delays
in the Land
Registry. Every member will appreciate how
these delays affect the general public in preventing
their ordinary
transactions being completed
promptly.
It also very seriously affects our
members in their professional relations with their
clients who naturally place the responsibility for
this unnecessary delay on the Solicitor instead of
on a department, with which the ordinary client
has no contact and of which he has very little
knowledge. On the 2nd July last, the Secretary
wrote to the Department of Justice and pointed
out the serious inconvenience caused by the
lengthy delay in the Registry after documents
had been lodged.
A reply was received that
this question was a subject of correspondence
between the Departments of Justice and Finance.
Again, on the 18th of last month, the Secretary
wrote
to
the Department of Justice giving
a number of instances of delays, and also sent
.a copy of this letter to the Registrar of Titles.
The Registrar replied stating that the delays
were due to lack of sufficient staff to deal with
the increasing volume of work in the Land
Registry. He added that he had made repeated
representations to the Department of Justice and
understood that the question of staffing was
under consideration by
the Department of
Finance. We are all agreed that no blame is
attachable to the Land Registry Officials who are
not alone very efficient, but most courteous, and
that the Department of Finance is responsible for
the length of time they have allowed this matter
to drift. I hope that by directing public attention
to such a state of affairs, it will immediately be
remedied.
It is only right to draw our members
attention to the fact that the Registrar states that
a great deal of work is thrown on his staff by the
careless manner in which some practitioners
perform their conveyancing and registration work,
leading to much correspondence, queries and
rulings refusing registration, much of which would
not be necessary if the documents were properly
prepared. I trust that all solicitors will endeavour
to see that all documents for registration in the
Land Registry are properly prepared and so assist
the officials in an obviously understaffed office, in
carrying out their duties.
In my address at the last half-yearly meeting
I referred to correspondence that passed between
the Appointment Commissioners and this Society.
As a result of this correspondence the Commis
sioners have agreed to regard 60 per cent, in the
Society's Final Examination as equivalent to a
University Honours Degree for candidates for
Junior Administrative offices. The Commission
ers will accept a certificate from the Society as
sufficient evidence of the percentage secured by a
candidate for one of these appointments.
I feel that I should refer also to another matter
which
is mentioned
in
the Annual Report
and which
is
at present
the
subject of
correspondence between the Secretary and the
Department of Local Government. Section 20 of
the Neutrality (War Damage to Property Act),
1941, authorises the compulsory acquisition of
certain property by district planning authorities,
on payment of compensation to the owner. The
Act does not contain any specific provision for
the payment by the public authority acquiring
the property of the owners' costs of tshowing title,
and I am informed that the public authorities
require title to be fully shown in these cases.
The Dublin Corporation have refused to pay the
owner's costs of showing title in these cases on the
ground that they have been advised by counsel
that they have no power to make such payment
in the absence of specific authority in the Act
authorising the acquisition.
In every other case
of which I am aware, except one which I shall
mention in a moment, it is the invariable practice
of the local authorities to pay the owners' costs
of making title where his property is taken
compulsorily.
The exception to which I have
referred is the Derelict Sites Act, 1940, in which
the Dublin Corporation has refused to pay the
costs for a similar reason,
viz.,
that they are not
empowered by Statute to do so.
By direction of the Council the Secretary wrote
to the Secretary of. the Department of Local
Government in July last, drawing attention to
what are apparently omissions in both these
Acts and asking that they should be remedied
with as little delay as possible. A reply was
received from the Department that the matter
was being discussed with the City Law Agent.
I am informed that in reply to a question in the
Senate yesterday the Minister stated that he was
satisfied that the public authorities had full power
to pay these costs under existing legislation.
It
is clear that there is a difference of legal opinion
between the Department and the Corporation,
38