98 / 328
Maher, J. R. C. Green.
Operation of the Courts:
R.
J. Walker, R. McD. Taylor.
Law of Evidence :
T. A.
O'Reilly, Peter E. O'Connell.
Civil Liability for
Animals:
W. A. Tormey, Desmond Moran.
Criminal Law:
Gerald Goldberg, Herman Good.
Examination results
The report of the Court of Examiners on the
results of the preliminary and first and second Irish
examinations was adopted and the results declared.
Brandaris Insurance Company Limited
The Council considered a communication received
from
the English Law Society on
the above
company which is now in liquidation. Members
were notified by means of a circular sent with the
last issue of THE GAZETTE of the fact that this
company was in liquidation and were asked to
communicate with the Society for advice if they
found themselves involved in claims against persons
insured by the company.
The Motor Insurers
Bureau of 107 Cheapside, London E.G. 2., appear
to be the body responsible under their agreement
with the British Government for liabilities on
policies issued by the Brandaris Insurance Co., Ltd.
for compulsorily insurable risks. A solicitor acting
for a client who has a claim against a person insured
by the company should bear in mind the possible
interest of the Motor Insurers Bureau in the matter
and that notice should be given to the Bureau in
sufficient time to enable it to consider its position,
certainly before judgment is signed in default or
otherwise. It is understood that according to the
strict terms of the agreement between the British
Minister for Transport and the Motor Insurers
Bureau notice of the intention of bringing pro
ceedings must be given to the Bureau before or
within twenty-one days after the commencement of
the proceedings, but that strict application of the
time limit will not be insisted upon. The Bureau
will meet the costs involved only where these are
not discharged by the defendant, and the plaintiff
will be required to assign the judgment to the
Bureau who will be at liberty to prove in liquidation
of the company. If the claim is in respect of a head
of damage which is not compulsorily insurable the
solicitor acting for the claimant may have to consider
the financial standing of the defendant as the Bureau
may not be liable in such an event. It is not known
whether the Brandaris Insurance Co., Ltd. were
members of the Irish Motor Insurers Bureau who
have a similar agreement with the Minister for Local
Government.
The address of the Irish Motor
Insurers Bureau is 4 Eustace Street, Dublin 2, and
it is advisable, to be on the safe side, to give notice
to both Bureaus. Copies of the Irish agreement may
be obtained from the Department of Local Govern
ment, the Motor Insurers Bureau or the Government
Publications Office.
SPECIAL GENERAL MEETING
A special general meeting of the Society was held
in the Society's library on Friday, 9th March, 1962,
at 2.30 o'clock. The President took the chair.
The meeting was summoned for further considera
tion of the question of a regulation under section 71
of the Solicitors Act, 1954, prohibiting or restricting
solicitors from acting for both parties in convey
ancing matters.
The notice convening the meeting was by per
mission of the meeting taken as read.
The following draft regulation was circulated for
the consideration of the members present:
Where property is advertised for sale by pubL.
auction neither the solicitor nor the vendor nor
his partner or assistant shall act for the purchaser
of such property in connection with the purchase
thereof contracted before auction, at the auction
or within six months after the auction and the
purchaser shall be
bona fide
represented by an
independent solicitor.
The PRESIDENT opened the discussion and explained the
effect of the proposed regulation. He stated that there is a
difference of opinion in the profession as to whether or not
such a regulation should be made. The matter had been
considered by the Council who were in favour of making
a rule but not necessarily unanimously.
Some individual
members of the Council expressed the views of Bar Associa
tions. There were strong views on each side in the Bar
Associations and the Council had decided to submit the matter
to a further general meeting with a view to ascertaining the
profession's opinion on the matter. They requested members
to speak to the rule as drafted and circulated. There were
four principal arguments in favour of such a regulation.
Firstly, no man can serve two masters and there is always
a possible conflict of interest in conveyancing matters even
in cases where the equity note has been discharged. The
premiums charged by insurance companies on solicitors
profession's negligence policies have in the recent past been
sharply increased and it was felt that the practice of acting
for both parties might give rise to added risk. Secondly there
was the question of price-cut conveyancing because where
a solicitor acts for both parties his client invariably expects
to get a reduction even although the solicitor's responsibility
is doubled. Thirdly there was the question of unfair attraction
of business by solicitors and fourthly the question of touting
by auctioneers. One of the principal objections to acting for
both parties is that auctioneers conducting auctions in many
cases try to attract the purchaser to the vendor's solicitor.
The points advanced against the regulations were firstly that
it would be an undue interference with solicitors private
business and secondly that a solicitor who must send away
one client to another solicitor is in danger of losing that
client permanently. This would apply particularly in a small
town or village where there is only one permanent resident
solicitor who would of necessity have to send one party to
a conveyancing transaction to another town. The President
stated that the Council would consider the matter in the light
of any opinions expressed at the meeting and would not
introduce a rule without a postal ballot. He pointed out that