The Gazette 1982

100 / 250

g a z e t t e
attribute to advertising all the ills of solicitation, of
barratry, champerty, and maintenance. Your author
would insist that the difference between advertising and
solicitation is as clear and as morally defensible as that
between Ohralik and Primus (as glossed by Mr Justice
Marshall), but that is simple testimony (of his moral
vision) and not proof (of its independent truth).
One distinction between Primus and Ohralik not
previously treated of is that in the former, but not in the
latter, there was a written communication. The reader of a
letter, or of an advertisement, can effectively avoid further
bombardment; the victim of solicitation frequently cannot.
Unlike solicitation, advertising is open to public scrutiny,
gives rise to no special difficulties of proof and is readily
susceptible of regulation (as witness, even the Law
Society of Scotland's Solicitors' (Scotland) Practice
Rules, 1977 and 1978). Again, lay persons are more
vulnerable to solicitation than to advertising given that
lawyers are normally professionals trained, or at least
experienced, in the art of persuasion. Advertising simply
provides information, leaving an individual free to act on it
or otherwise; solicitation involves pressures, not least of
all in the apparent need for an instant answer without time
to take stock.
The justification of extending constitutional protection
to lawyer advertising, and that means, in effect,
prohibiting states prohibiting lawyers, turns upon the
concept of'informed and reliable decision making' (Bates
v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 us 350, 364). Above all, the
dissemination of information as to the availability, nature
and prices of legal services was seen as essential to the
consumer of legal services making a rational choice about
his life and about the selection of a lawyer. In Scotland,
despite its being of the private sector, the provision of legal
services is not a field of competition. The doctrines of
Adam Smith have never informed the political economy of
the provision of legal services. Prices are centrally
determined, not of course by government, but by the legal
profession's own governing body. So alien are the twin
doctrines of price competition and advertising that few
lawyers would even entertain offering a discount for
prompt payment of fees, out of a justifiable apprehension
that such offends the rules of the Law Society.
It is rather easy to construct a convincing case against
the legal profession relating to monopolies, restrictive
practices and even the closed shop. The competition and
openness normally associated with the private sector is
absent. Further liberalising of the advertising rules
together with modest and regulated price competition (and
therefore advertising) might provide a much-needed boost
for a profession under attack and rather too defensive and
unsure of kself for its own good or for the good of those it
serves. The legal profession has much to gain and little to
lose, both internally, and as against external predators, by
adopting a regulated but increasingly aggressive
marketing policy.
R. H. S. TUR
april 1982
Ruling of Settled
Jury Actions
The following Practice Direction has been received
from Mr. J. K. Waldron, the High Court registrar
Jury Actions set down for trial in any venue outside
Dublin may be ruled on a Monday in Dublin. In the case of
infant or fatal settlements, the ruling must be with papers
lodged beforehand as a listed ruling. In any other case, the
application should be made as an ex-parte application to
the Judge dealing with Ex-Parte applications on a Monday
morning. In every such case, however, it is essential that
with the papers must be lodged a note of the list number of
the case and the venue for which it is listed. This is
necessary in order to permit of the realistic up-dating of
lists awaiting trial at these venues.
With regard to infant and fatal cases (to be ruled on a
Monday) which have been set down for Dublin a similar
requirement arises.
23rd April 1982
Lady Solicitors9 Golfing Society
The 3rd of December last saw a gathering of
adventurous ladies beating their way through the purple
heather at the Heath Golf Club, Portlaoise. Wrapped in
Aran sweaters, shielded by waterproofs and insulated with
thermal woolies, some twenty ladies teed off — and
thereby marked the inauguration of the Lady Solicitors'
Golfing Society. Hours later, the first of the expedition
returned to the Clubhouse and, with tails to the fire and
"hot toddies" in hand, began to recount the inevitable tales
of the putt that wouldn't drop.
The outing was organised when Mrs Moya Quinlan,
then President of the Law Society, graciously offered to
present a perpetual trophy to the ladies. Players travelled
from Kilkenny, Dublin, Tullamore and Portlaoise to
compete for the prized trophy and for the miscellaneous
hampers for the runners up. We were delighted by the
number of guests who participated and they brought with
them a heartening relief from "requisitions on title" and
"Motions for Judgement".
After we had quenched the flames from the burning
plum pudding, Mrs. Quinlan presented the Quinlan
Perpetual Cup to Elaine Anthony (Terence Doyle & Co.,
Dublin) who brought in a tremendous score of 51 nett.
Other prize winners were:— 2nd nett: Mary Molloy,
Kilkenny. Best gross: Maeve Laningan, Kilkenny.
Visitors: 1st nett: Mrs. Jean Crawford. Best gross: Mrs.
Monica Culliton.
The 1982 Committee was elected and they are as
follows: Captain, Mary Meagher, Portlaoise; Secretary,
Elaine Anthony, Dublin; Treasurer, Maeve Lannigan,
Kilkenny; Hon. Member, Mrs. Moya Quinlan.
This year's outing will be held at Newland's Golf Club
on Monday 26th July and those interested in participating
should contact any of the members of the Committee. •
91