295 / 736
James A. Murphy, 2 High Street, Wexford.
Patrick H. Murtagh, B.A.
(Mod.)
(T.C.D.),
"Shrule", Ballymahon Rd., Athlone, Co. West-
meath.
Patrick J. McCarthy, Garralacka House, Clona-
kilty, Co. Cork (Silver Medal).
Gratton Neville, 2 Sandford Park, Dublin 6.
Donough H. O'Connor, B.C.L., LL.B., 15 Fair-
field Park, Rathgar, Dublin 6.
Fachtna O'Driscoll, B.C.L.,
"Droum", Cross
Douglas Road, Cork.
James M. O'Dwyer, B.C.L.
(N.U.I.), Killeen
House, Cashel, Co. Tipperary.
Gerrard M. F. O'Keeffe, Rockmount, Mallow, Co.
Cork.
Raymond M. O'Neill, Raphoe, Co. Donegal.
Rose M. O'Regan, B.C.L., Snugville, Skibbereen,
Co. Cork.
Anthony F. O'Rourke, B.C.L., 37 High Street,
Balbriggan, Co. Dublin.
Robin A. W. Peilow, 27 Whitebeam Road, Clon-
skeagh, Dublin 14.
Dudley Potter, B.A., LL.B., "Bannff", Portmarnock,
Co. Dublin.
Esmond Reilly,
"Eldervale", Bettystown, Co.
Meath.
Niall Sheehy, B.C.L., LL.B.
(N.U.I.), Foxfield,
Patrickswell, Co. Limerick.
A CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF THE PRICES
AND INCOMES BOARD'S REPORT ON
SOLICITORS' REMUNERATION
This article is reproduced from
The Law
Society's Gazette,
with the kind permis
sion of the author, printers and publishers
In their report on "Remuneration of Solicitors"
(cmd 3529) published on the 8th February, the
National Board for Prices and Incomes have by no
means confined themselves to proposals for changes
in solicitors' charges. They have, in addition to
their recommendations in respect of solicitors' fees
for conveyancing and county court work, made a
number of suggestions (hardly any of which could
be described as novel as they have nearly all been
the subject of consideration from time to time by
the Council of the Law Society) for changes in
the pattern of solicitors' practices and even in the
structure of the legal profession itself.
That they have thought fit to make suggestions
of this nature rather than to concentrate on the
level of charges which solicitors are authorised to
make, need cause no surprise. The Board have
built up quite a reputation for tendentious obser
vations and were unlikely to resist the temptation
to continue in the same vein when confronted for
the first time with an inquiry into the earnings of
a profession. Indeed their terms of reference were
sufficiently widely drawn to be almost an invitation
to them to take this line, as there had been referred
to them for examination "the question of all rele
vant factors affecting the professional earnings of
solicitors". Although there were added "having
regard in particular to work done in the county
courts and on business to which the scales of costs
prescribed by the Solicitors Remuneration Orders
apply", these words were clearly not treated by the
Board as limitative; they have accordingly gone
beyond what they stated in paragraph seven of
their report to be "the proper criterion for looking
at the price of a service" namely "whether it pro
duces a profit adequate to secure the investment
of the necessary resources, which in this case are
trained manpower, and secures an efficient allo
cation of those resources". They have "concluded
that our reference relates to such monopoly rights
as may be conferred on solicitors by law, monopoly
practices as solicitors may have chosen to develop
them, and to restrictions on the extension of solici
tors' activities as may arise either from law or
practice"; Provided presumably
(although
the
Board do not specifically say so) that such matters
can be said to have a bearing, directly or indirectly,
on solicitors' incomes.
The Principal Recommendations
It is not intended in this article to list all the
recommendations made in the Prices and Incomes
Board's report. Those which have a direct bearing
on solicitors' charges can, however, be briefly stated
aand are :
(a)
County Court
(i) That there should be an increase in solici
tors' charges "so that in total an increase of
about fifty-five per cent
in
income from
county court work results for the present
level of work"—it being left to the County
Court Rules Committee to consider how indi
vidual fees should be adjusted to achieve this.
(ii) That solicitors' charges for divorce work in
the county court "should be consistent with
our recommendation for an increase in the
level of county court income".
(b)
Conveyancing
(iii) That there should be an increase in convey
ancing scale charges for transactions below
£2,000.
(iv) That there should be a reduction of six per
16