325 / 336
Correspondence
Land Registry, Central Office,
Chancery Street,
Dublin 7.
4th December, 1975.
Re: Delays where Maps are Unsuitable
Office of the Revenue Commissioners,
Capital Taxes Branch,
Dublin Castle.
Dublin 2.
December 5, 1975.
Dear Mr. Ivers,
There have been many complaints from solicitors
regarding delays in notifying them where maps lodged
by them in sub-division cases are unsuitable.
Under Rule 56 of the 1972 Land Registration Rules
the plan showing the part of the property in a folio the
subject of the application should be drawn on the
current largest scale map published by the Ordnance
Survey. Frequently the map lodged is not on this scale.
The point is made by practitioners that they must
take the map supplied by their clients surveyor and may
not be aware of its unsuitability and that it is onerous
on them if it is not pointed out for some considerable
time -after the sub-division application has been lodged
in the Registry. (It is a matter for the surveyor em-
ployed to mark the part being transferred clearly and
unambiguously on a map that complies with the pro-
visions of Rule 56).
We are arranging that from the 1st January next
the map when lodged will be checked to see if it com-
plies with the provisions of Rule 56. If not the practit-
ioner will have the documents returned to him within
a few days with a note indicating the reason for its
unsuitability. It should be noted however that surveying
errors, boundary conflicts and the like will not be de-
tected by this preliminary check.
Many registered holdings are defined on the Registry
Map on a lesser scale than the current largest scale
Ordnance Map and in such crses a Land Registry Copy
Map is usually not suitable for sub-division purposes.
It is to be noted that the Land Commission do not
insist on Land Registry Copy Maps for the purpose of
applications for their consent to sub-divide.
Yours sincerely,
N. M. Griffith,
Registrar.
(Implementation of the above has been suspended
Certificate of Discharge under Section 20
Wealth Tax Act 1975
Dear Sir,
I am directed by the Revenue Commissioners to
acknowledge receipt of your letter of the 24th ultimo
and to refer you to Section 19 of the Wealth Tax Act
1975. This section provides that all wealth tax due by
an assessable person shall be a charge on any im-
movable property comprised in the taxable wealth of
that person. Furthermore the immovable property re-
mains charged to that wealth tax in the hrnds of a
purchaser where the consideration for the sale or the
consideration for that sale and sales between the same
parties over a period of two years exceeds £50,000.
Section 20 makes provision for the issue of a certi-
ficate to discharge the property from liability to wealth
tax.
To release the property by the issue of a certificate
you will appreciate that the Commissioners must be
satisfied that the tax has been or will be paid. For that
reason in cases where the Wealth Táx has not already
been paid a payment on account is normally requested
before a certificate is issued.
It should be noted that under section 2 of the Act the
charge to wealth tax arises each and every year on and
from the 5th April.
Yours faithfully,
B. A. GIBLIN.
James J. Ivers, Esq.
Director General,
pending further instructions).
Chancellor of the National University of Ireland
From the foundation of the National University of
Ireland in 1908, there have been only two Chancellors
of the University, and each of them was elected unani-
mously without opposition. They were Most Rev. Dr.
Walsh, Archbishop of Dublin (1908-1921) and Mr.
Eamonn De Valera (1921-1975). There will now be a
contest for the Chancellorship for the first time and nine
candidates have been validly nominated. Theoretically,
the 67,000 graduates of the National University are
eligible to vote, but many have changed their registered
address and will be untraced. The ballot papers will
be sent out from December 1975 and have to be re-
turned to the office of the National University of Ireland
in 49 Merrion Square, Dublin 2, by the beginning of
May 1976. The result will be declared in May 1976.
The most eminent legal candidate amongst the nomi-
nated candidates is Mr. Justice Brian Walsh, proposed
by the Attorney-General (Mr. Declan Costello, S.C.)
and seconded by Professor T. B. Gounihan, M.D. Mr.
Justice Walsh has not only been an eminent and dedi-
cated member of the Supreme Court since 1961, but, as
Chairman of the Committee on Court Practice and
Procedure, has been responsible for issuing more than
twenty reports on the improvement of Court Procedure.
The learned Judge, as Chairman of the recently-
appointed Law Commission is having a detailed scheme
of Law Reform prepared. The Judge has also experi-
ence of university administration, having been nomin-
ated by the Government as a member of the Governing
Body of University College, Dublin, from 1958 to 1970.
3 Í 8