BOOK REVIEWS
The Irish Judiciary
by Paul C. Bartholomew; Dublin,
Institute of Public Administration, 1971; 8vo; pp. 86;
£1.25.
The purpose of this book, according to the Preface, is
to take a brief but reasonably thorough look at the
judiciary of Ireland. This purpose is hardly achieved;
in chapter one there is a description of the Irish Courts,
dull but on the whole accurate. Solicitors will resent
the fact that they are described as "the lesser branch of
law" who deal with routine matters" (p. 6). The cases
do not bear out the fact that religion was the dominant
factor in child custody cases (p. 17). There is an all too
brief description of judicial review, and our
Gazette
is
omitted amongst other legal journals (p. 21). The work
of the solicitors is inaccurately described on page 22. It
is not accurate that Chief Justice Conor Maguire was
the last person to appear personally as Attorney
General on behalf of the State (p. 36).
The second chapter deals with present-day Irish
judges and, after interviewing many judges, the author
is right to be critical about the method of appointment
based to a large extent on political considerations.
Doubtless it is true that some judges have proved to be
"obstructive, arrogant and overbearing," however, no
less than 43 per cent consider themselves as liberals.
The fact that most judges are not promoted to a higher
Court undoubtedly ensures their independence. The
lack of consultation amongst legal experts in making
appointments is rightly deplored. The typical Irish
judge is described as living in Dublin, born in urban
surroundings from the upper middle-class, a graduate
of U.C.D. who has legal relatives. There are then five
pages of statistics relating to the judges.
The third part, called Irish Law, is the most unsatis-
factory part of the book. It purports to deal skimpily
with the fundamental rights provisions of the Irish
Constitution, and makes some useful comparison with
the American Constitution. As Professor Bartholomew
specialises in political science and international rela-
tions, and is not a lawyer one need not be surprised that
the constitutional decis
:
ons cited are incomplete. Art.
40 (3) of the Constitution, which is the most funda-
mental provision of our liberties is disposed of in less
than a page.
As Mr. Justice Kingsmill Moore pointed out recently
in introducing this book, it will serve its purpose if the
layman learns more accurate facts about the Irish
judiciary from it.
Litigants in Person.
A Report by Justice; London,
Stevens, 1971; 8vo; pp. 33; £1.
The problem of personal litigants who had no knowl-
edge of law has always presented difficulties, and a
committee of Justice under the chairmanship of Mr.
Rex Church has endeavoured to solve these problems.
It has made the following recommendations.
(1) The personnel of the High Court should be
increased and be so organised as to be able to deal with
the extra work arising from litigants in person. In view
of the manner in which personal litigants are often
encouraged in Ireland at the expense of the legal pro-
fession, this may also be necessary here.
(2) In England, an "amicus curiae" is appointed
from time to time to assist the Court in matters of law
and fact, who does not represent the litigant, but who
has a duty to see that his case does not go by default.
It is suggested that this procedure should be more often
availed of here.
(3) An official of the Court should be appointed so
that the Court of Appeal or Supreme Court might refer
to him an unannounced or ill-prepared application for
the issues to be clarified in a report to the Court. This
appears to be a sensible suggestion.
(4) Provision for civil legal aid and advice should
be extended, and it should be made available if neces-
sary for plaintiffs in libel actions, and for defendants in
libel and slander. This is a worthy suggestion which will
certainly not be followed here.
(5) The High Court should have power to order
legal aid, if, as a case proceeds, it appears necessary in
the interests of justice. This reform would appear to be
essential, but will hardly be implemented he;e.
(6) The costs of a successful represented party should
be paid from public funds when the litigant in person
is impecunious. In this country, lawyers would normally
be willing to act for an impecunious client, if the pros-
pects of winning the action are good. This recommen-
dation would therefore seem superfluous here.
(7) Before any action involving a litigant in person
can be listed for trial, a certificate from the Master of
the High Court would have to be produced that the
documents are in order. This is a sensible suggestion
which would avoid useless duplication.
(8) If a particular litigant is vexatious and pursues
several unmeritorious actions at once, the procedure
for declaring him vexatious should be simplified, and
capable of being brought into effect more easily. It will
be evident that the committee of Justice has taken
much trouble to consider the difficult problem of the
personal litigant and to suggest appropriate remedies.
Constitutional and Administrative Law
by H. W.
Clarke; London, Sweet & Maxwell, 1971; 8vo; pp.
xvi + 206; hardback £2.50, paperback £1.25.
This handy volume, published in the "Concise College
Texts" series by the Principal Lecturer in Law of the
Mid-Essex Technical College, is a most useful and
readable summary of the subjects it purports to cover.
Such matters as "The House of Lords", "The House
of Commons", "The Monarchy", "Parliamentary
Privilege", "Delegated Legislation", "Local Govern-
ment" and "Civil Liberties" are covered in an inter-
esting manner. If only Professor Bartholomew, in
writing his recent pamphlet reviewed in the issue, had
consulted volumes in this series they would have given
him a most useful headline on how to write a readable
volume about law.
C.G.D.
Stroud—Judicial Dictionary of Words and Phrases.
Fourth edition by John S. James; Volume I : A-C;
London, Sweet & Maxwell, 1971; 8vo; pp. xxiv + 671.
The first edition of this learned work appeared as long
ago as 1890, but the five volumes of the second edition,
165