323 / 736
Department, Mr. T. O'Brien and Mr. Cronin.
The subject of the meeting was the depreciation
of land bonds due to the increase in the rate of
interest with the consequent loss to owners whose
lands have been acquired and solicitors.
Both sides were in agreement that the present
position
is
inequitable and
that payment
for
lands acquired by land bonds which are difficult
to sell and which rapidly depreciate in value is
not in accordance with justice. The following pro
posals were made on behalf of the Society.
1. That all lands should be acquired for pay
ment in cash.
2. If payments are made in land bonds the
following conditions should be attached and
if necessary legislation enacted to this effect.
(a) All bonds should carry a right of con
version
into any subsequent
issue of
land bonds at a higher rate of interest.
(b) Bonds should be convertable into subse
quent issues of Government stock.
(c) Bonds should be available for payment
of death duties and income tax.
(d) The judge should have discretion at the
allocation stage to make an additional
award of land bonds to compensate for
any depreciation in value on that date
so that the actual market price of land
bonds should equal the purchase price
of the land.
It was pointed out and agreed by the Land Com
mission that apart from the question of deprecia
tion in value it
is often difficult or well nigh
impossible to sell land bonds. There is no ready
market for these bonds. The Land Commission
and the Land Judge were strongly of the opinion
that the purchase of lands by means of land bonds
had broken down, is inequitable and should be
replaced by a system of cash payments. Up to the
present the Department of Finance have never
agreed to this proposal although it has been ad
vanced a number of times. The Minister said that
strong representations are being made
to
the
Department of Finance.
The deputation also raised the question of pay
ment of solicitors' costs which include outlay in
land bonds at depreciated values. It is pointed
out that legislation was enacted some years ago
or payment of auctioneer's commission in cash.
Solicitors' costs are payable from the costs fund
which is constituted by land bonds and there is a
technical difficulty here.
Payment by means of land bonds was originally
devised to deal with large estates of landlords
compulsorily acquired under the legislation from
1886 onwards. Many of these estates were settled
and the bonds were calculated to provide the
estate including life tenants and remainder men
with the same income as they got from the rents.
It was generally agreed by both sides that this
system is inequitable and inappropriate where the
lands of owner/occupiers are being acquired.
About one fifth of the total purchase monies of
lands acquired voluntarily or compulaorily are for
payment in cash each year.
CRIMINAL LEGAL AID COSTS
A deputation from the Society was received by
the Minister for Justice on the 16th July, 1969.
The Society had submitted a memorandum to
the Department on
the 22nd October,
1968,
pointing out that the Criminal Legal Aid Scheme
came into operation on the 1st April, 1965 and
that the Minister in
the course of discussions
with the Society had written on the 16th Novem
ber, 1964 agreeing that the costs proposed by him
should operate for a period of two years and that
the matter would then be reviewed in the light of
experience. The Department had admitted that
the fees proposed were in fact inadequate but the
Society's representatives were
informed at that
time that the Department of Finance would not
agree to the introduction of a scheme of any form
unless
they were satisfied that the expenditure
falling on public funds would be confined to cer
tain limits. The Council had asked the profession
to accept the scheme as it stood for a trial period.
It was pointed out
in
the Society's
recent
memorandum that the Council had ascertained
as a result of enquiries from the profession that
the general body of members on the legal aid
panel regard the present scheme as unsatisfactory.
The principal points stressed were :
1. The basic inadequacy of the fees prescribed
for solicitors in the circumstances prevailing
at the date of initiation of the scheme.
2. The changes
in
financial and economical
conditions since the scheme was introduced.
3. The failure of the scheme to make any pro
vision
for cases
involving heavy penalty
work particularly in the Circuit and Criminal
Courts and the absence of any element of
discretion in assessing fees on the basis of
the principle of reasonable remuneration for
work necessarily done which is accepted in
England and Northern Ireland.
For the purpose of comparing the Criminal Legal
Aid scheme in Northern Ireland and the free Legal
Aid scheme in the Republic the deputation had
43