The Gazette 1993

GAZETTE

MAY 1993

Council Decides to hold General

Meeting on Finance Act

At its meeting on Friday, 16 April,

the Council of the Law Society

decided to hold a Special General

Meeting of members of the

profession on Thursday, 17 June,

1993 to consider the progress that

had been made in overcoming the

difficulties posed by the provisions

of Part VII of the Finance Act, 1992

in relation to confidentiality and the

administrative burden that the

provisions would impose upon

solicitors. The Chairman of the

Taxation Committee reported to the

Council that an assurance had been

obtained from the Revenue

I Commissioners on the issue of

confidentiality and in no instance

would a solicitor have to name a

client on whose behalf a payment

had been made. There had also been

considerable progress on resolving

some of the other difficulties arising

from the legislation.

Council members were unanimous in

their congratulations to the Taxation

Committee on the progress that had

been achieved through negotiations

with the Commissioners. The

Council decided that, in the light of

the motion passed at the Special

General Meeting held in July, 1992,

members of the profession must be

given an opportunity to consider the

matter. It was decided, therefore,

that while the issue would be

discussed at the Half Yearly Meeting

at the Annual Conference in

Connemara, a Special General

Meeting should be held in June at

which a specific motion would be

put to the members of the

profession.

Society Policy -

Sole Practitioners

The Council discussed the

widespread reaction in the profession

the article in the Sunday Business

Post which was critical of single

practitioners and small firms. The

Council agreed that the reaction had

exposed a deeper issue, namely, that

there was a perception by sole

practitioners and smaller firms that

the Society was not fully taking their

views and interests into account.

While this was emphatically not the

case, nonetheless the perception

needed to be dealt with and it was

recognised that there was a need to

communicate better to the profession

the activities undertaken by the

Council and the Society on behalf of

all members of the profession. For

example, the efforts and intensive

lobbying that had been undertaken

to try to ensure that Section 29 (2)

of the Solicitors' Bill (which would

permit the Society to specify

different rates of contribution to the

Compensation Fund) was removed

from the legislation had not be

sufficiently emphasised to the

profession at large and particularly

to sole practitioners and small firms.

It was suggested that there was a

need to strengthen contact with

small firms and sole practitioners.

Financial Pressure in the Profession

The Chairman of the Remuneration

and Costs Committee gave the

Council a preliminary overview of

the results of the survey that had

been sent to every practice on

remuneration and costs. He said

there had been a very high rate of

response to the survey. 64% of

replies had been received from sole

practitioners. Many respondents had

indicated that areas of practice such

as family law, landlord and tenant,

social welfare and employment law

were quite unprofitable forms of

work. A majority of respondents

also felt that conveyancing was

unprofitable and that undercutting

was becoming a problem. It

appeared that many practices relied

on litigation and probate to sustain

viability. The survey indicated that

as many as 20% of respondents

did not have a clear picture of

how much it cost to run their offices

and had not calculated what the

profit element of their turnover was.

The Council decided that the

information provided by the survey

was a further indication that the

issue of remuneration in the

profession would have to be

addressed. It was proposed that a

high-level sub-committee would sit to

consider the issue further,

comprising the Chairman of the

Education, Compensation Fund,

Registrar's and Remuneration/Costs

Committees respectively.

It was also suggested that the

Society should try to assess the

number of solicitors required to meet

the demand for legal services in this

country and that perhaps this work

would need to be done by an

independent expert.

Solicitors (Amendment) Bill

The Council was informed that the

1991 Solicitors (Amendment) Bill

had been withdrawn and would be

replaced by a new Bill. The Society

had been successful in having over

100 amendments accepted by the

Department of Justice. Negotiations

were continuing on some crucial

issues including a cap on the

Compenation Fund and the Society

felt hopeful of making progress on

this issue. It was hoped to have a

meeting with the Minister for Justice

in the very near future. It was

unlikely that in the event of a new

Bill being introduced, it would be

circulated in the Dail before the

Autumn session.

Education Review

The Chairman of Education

Committee reported that the

Education Review Group had prepared

its report. A special meeting of the

Education Committee had been held

and it had made recommendations on

foot of the report and both were now

being put before the President of the

Society for consideration.

•

126