Previous Page  219 / 324 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 219 / 324 Next Page
Page Background

Vol. 51

No. 2

JUNE,

1957

THE GAZETTE

of the

INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY OF IRELAND

President

NIALL S. GAFFNEY

Vice-frtsidenti

DESMOND J. COLLINS

CHARLES J. DOWNING

StcTitary

ERIC A. PLUNKETT

FOR CIRCULATION AMONG MEMBERS

IMPORTANT—TURN TO PAGE 21

MEETINGS OF THE COUNCIL

MAY 30TH: The President in the Chair.

Also

present John R. Halpin, D. J. Mayne, C. E. Callan,

Joseph P. Tyrrell, Ralph J. Walker, Patrick R.

Boyd, Peter D. O'Connell, Francis J. Lanigan,

John Carrigan, Desmond J. Collins, Charles J.

Downing, W. J. Comerford, John Maher, John

J. Shell, Dermot P. Shaw, George G. Overend,

F. X. Burke, Thomas A. O'Reilly, Terence de Vere

White, Arthur Cox, James R. Quirke, George A.

Nolan.

The following was among the business transacted.

Costs of debt collection work.

A COMMITTEE to which this matter had been re

ferred reported that having consulted a number of

solicitors to carry on debt collection work they

had come to the conclusion that it would be im

possible to frame a satisfactory scale of costs for

non-contentious business. It was recommended that

no action be taken other than publishing in the

Gazette

a statement of the ruling recently given

(Gazette

February, 1957 page 68) that a solicitor

should not accept from a client costs lower than

the statutory party and party costs for contentious

debt collection work.

The report was adopted.

Circuit Court. Travelling expenses.

THE Committee considered a report from a Com

mittee on a suggestion by a Bar Association that

the Society should approach

the Circuit Court

Rules Committee requesting them to make a new

rule providing for

the allowance of travelling

expenses as between party and party in addition

to the statutory costs. The Committee stated that

they were informed that in some circuits the County

Registrar will allow travelling expenses as between

party and party in cases in which the costs are

taxed on the scale in the High Court less one fifth,

by analogy with the practice under the High Court

Rules 1926 appendix II item 194 but that this

practice is not followed everywhere.

The Com

mittee stated that in their opinion the matter was

suitable for representations by Bar Associations

if advised to the County Registrar or if necessary