760 / 822
CORRESPONDENCE
FERMOY,
Co. CORK.
-jtb June,
1948.
POACHING
DEAR SIR,
" LEX " has raised an important point, but one
on which there is no room for two opinions;
if the other side is represented by a Solicitor, then
there should be no question of negotiation save
through the Solicitors or Counsel.
But if the other side is not represented by a
Solicitor and seek to negotiate " without prejudice,"
are they entitled to the protection of this convention ?
Are they entitled to " time" on an undertaking
not to raise delay against you ?
Should a Solicitor act on such undertaking ?
If he does so and his client is damnified has he
any genuine complaint ?
If later the other side
instructs a Solicitor, is he bound as if he had entered
into
the negotiation
" without prejudice"
or
given the undertaking not to raise the delay, etc. ?
If we are entitled to adopt the attitude " if you
do not instruct a Solicitor there will be no negotia
tion or delay " and prosecute the threatened pro
ceedings without delay until such time as a Solicitor
is instructed, we should adopt it.
If we are not entitled to adopt that attitude
in the now so different circumstances from those
in which these conventions were developed, then
it would be well that the Law Society should lay
down the limits within which these conventions
should or may be extended to negotiators who
are not either Solicitors or Counsel.
Yours faithfully,
JAMES R. BARRY.
Printed by Cahill &• Co., Ltd., Parkgate Printing Works, Dublin.