The Gazette 1984

GAZETTE

JANUARY/FEBRUARY 1984

quotations from the various interests operating in the

field of professional indemnity insurance. Mr. Crivon

referred to the discussions which he had from time to time

with Mr. Carr, IUA, on the subject of continuity bonus.

He felt it a pity that the Society had moved away from

IUA as its official broker and, at the same time, thought it

a mistake for the Society to back any particular firm, since

circumstances tended to change.

The President explained that IUA gave credit to those

solicitors who were with them for a number of years. The

Society's problem in the past year was that the

underwriters for the approved scheme sought a 90%

increase in premium due to the heavy claims experienced

and for that reason, the Society had to take action. It had

to be accepted that it was in the profession's interest to

have the insurance proceeds in one pot of money rather

than have it spread around. The difficulty was that in that

situation, particularly with the bad experience, there

could be no guarantee of continuity. In reply to Mr.

Garvan, he explained that it would not be possible to tie in

with the English or Scots scheme since both schemes were

on a compulsory basis and as a result, their premiums

were significantly higher than those obtainable in this

country. He explained to Mr. Crivon that a significant

number of claims were in the conveyancing area.

Disciplinary

Referring to the media comment, Mr. Eunan

McCarron congratulated the Disciplinary Committee on

the work done over the year which represented a very

considerable demand on the individual members of the

Committee. He favoured the inclusion of lay represen-

tation in the Committee.

Litigation

Mr. Moran pointed out that the increase in the number

of cases in the High Court was caused to a large extent by

inflation and on that account, the Society should agitate

continuously to have the jurisdiction increased. He also

asked that representations be made with a view to having

the fines under the Summary Jurisdiction Acts brought to

a reasonable level. He paid tribute to Mr. Frewen's work

in the Central Office since he had been assigned there. Mr.

Murphy referred to the delays now arising in the District

Court in Dublin, particularly to the work load in the

Family Law area, and also, to the delay in the District

Court Offices in getting documents out. The President

said that representations on the matters mentioned had

been made by him and by Mr. L. Shields in his capacity as

President of the Dublin Solicitors' Bar Association.

Mr. T. C. G. O'Mahony raised the question of the

publication of correspondence in the

Gazette

and the uses

to which the premises at Blackhall Place were put. Mr.

Buckley, on behalf of the

Gazette,

and the President, for

the Premises Committee, replied to the queries raised. Mr.

Murphy said that in reading the reports, he appreciated

that the Council and its Committees had undertaken a lot

of hard work during the year. He felt it a pity that there

was not a greater feedback to the members. The President

commented that the reports as presented to the Council in

the first six months of the year were circulated to the

individual members, and many appreciative comments

had been received.

In relation to 'Law in the Schools', Mr. Garvan asked if

the Committee had considered drawing up a list of

speakers. He also inquired as to what the Society intended

doing about the Criminal Justice Bill, 1983, and in

particular, what action it proposed taking to defend the

right to silence. The President said that the Committee

organised a Symposium on 26th November, 1983, in

Blackhall Place, on the Criminal Justice Bill. A sub-

Committee had put in a considerable amount of work in

examining the terms of the Bill and its report and

recommendations would be considered by the Council

with a view to public comment by the Society. In addition,

the Association of Criminal Lawyers had made very

worthwhile comments on the Bill for which he

commended the Association. Mr. Anthony Ensor

explained that it was clear that the approach of sending

people into schools to talk on the subject of law was not

acceptable to the school authorities. Other approaches

were being considered by the sub-Committee concerned

at the moment.

Education

Mr. Eugene McCague urged members to heed the plea

that vacancies be made available for intending

apprentices who had passed the final examination First

Part, since with the downturn in the economy, placement

was a problem. He also raised the question of the Society

subsidising the Law School. Mr. Crivon put forward the

contrary view that the Society was far too open in its

acceptance of apprentices. He referred to the many

recently qualified solicitors who were unable to obtain

employment, and were opening legal offices without any

experience. This course was bound to lead to a disaster

and he urged that the Society should use the apprentice-

ship system as a regulatory method in times of over supply

of solicitors. The President commented that the views put

forward were not compatible. The whole issue had been

raised by the Chairman, Education Committee, in a paper

which would be considered by his Committee and by the

Policy Committee in January. Mr. Ken Murphy

commented that the Society should not be trying to limit

the entry to the profession by subterfuge and should face

up to the problem created by the present over supply

situation.

Company Law

Mr. Crivon commented on the correspondence with the

Ac c o u n t a n cy I n s t i t u t es r e g a r d i ng a c c o u n t a n ts

undertaking work proper to the solicitors' profession and

urged members to be more careful in dealing with

members of the Accountancy Institutes.

Professional Indemnity

In reply to a query from Mr. T. C. G. O'Mahony

regarding the inspection of files by an auditor employed

by the Society, as required in a recent notice in the

Gazette,

Mr. Joseph Dundon explained the problems

which had arisen and the manner in which such

investigations would be carried out. In the ordinary way,

the accountant would only be allowed access to the

accountancy record on a file and not to any other

material. The problem was being further reviewed by the

Comp e n s a t i on F u nd Comm i t t ee in light of

recommendations which he had made to it.

Law Clerks J.L.C.

Mr. G. M. Doyle asked that this item be listed in future

Annual Reports.