51 / 300
EDITORIAL
Social Insurance for all
The principle of social insurance for all appears to
have been accepted, when the Social Welfare Act
1973 was passed. Section 12 of that Act removed the
remuneration limit of £1,600 which had been intro-
duced by the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions)
Act 1965 as from 1 April 1974 and henceforth all
persons, whether employed or self-employed, are at one
stroke liable to pay social welfare contributions regard-
less of their remuneration. Socialists contend that if all
persons pay the requisite contributions, they will in due
course be entitled to the requisite benefits. This does
not appear to take into account the wide wording of
Article 40, Section 3 of the Constitution by which the
State guarantees in its laws to respect and as far as
possible to defend and vindicate the personal rights of
the citizens. Furthermore the State is compelled without
limit to protect as best it may, and in the case of
injustice done, to vindicate the life, person, good name
and property rights of every citizen. Insofar as a citizen
wishes voluntarily to join the State social insurance
scheme, obviously no restraints should be placed upon
his wish. But it is submitted that previous Constitu-
FEBRUARY 7
The President in the Chair also present Messrs. B.
Allen, Walter Beatty, Bruce St. J. Blake, John F.
Buckley, John Carrigan, Anthony E. Collins, Gerard M.
Doyle, Joseph L. Dundon, James R. C. Green, Gerald
Hickey, Christopher Hogan, Michael P. Houlihan,
Thomas Jackson, John B. Jermyn, Francis J. Lanigan,
John Maher, Ernest J. kargetson, Perald J. Maloney,
Patrick C. Moore, Patrick McEntee, Brendan A.
McGrath, John J. Nash, Peter E. O'Connell, Patrick F.
O'Donnell, Dermot G. O'Donovan, James W. O'Dono-
van, Rory O'Connor, William A. Osborne, David R.
Pigot, Mrs. Moya Quinlan, Brian W. Russell, Robert
McD. Taylor and Ralph J. Walker.
Gazumping
The Council has arranged with the Construction
Industry Federation for a meeting between members of
the Legal Profession and of the Building Industry with
regard to formulating standard policy relating to book-
ing deposits taken by builders on new houses and to
prevent any forms of "gazumping".
tional judgments of the Supreme Court can be relied
upon for the proposition that the Minister has not acted
in accordance with the Constitution by compelling
everybody to join a social insurance scheme willy-nilly)
whether they wish to avail of the benefits or not, on the
alleged ground of the Common good. It has been
stated in the Sinn Fein Funds case—1950 I.R.—that
the common good is not within the exclusive preserve
of the Legislature. This appears therefore, to be a
manifest injustice to the personal and property rights
of the citizen if he has made satisfactory private
arrangements through insurance to meet contingencies
like illness, death or unemployment. In many Continen-
tal countries, all citizens above a prescribed limit, which
presumably would be £2,400, have a free choice to join
or not to join a social insurance scheme. If as a result
of
Fitzpatrick v. Educational
Company,
a citizen has
a right to join or not to join a trade union, it
submitted that a citizen above a prescribed limit has
all the more a right to join or not to join a prescribed
social insurance scheme.
Twelfth Interim Report of the Committee on Court
Practise and Procedure
The Society have made detailed representations to
the Department of Justice and Court organisations. The
views of local Bar Associations were stressed by the
Society in its representations.
Review of Conveyancing Procedures
The Council appointed a Committee to review con-
veyancing procedures with a view to suggesting legis-
lative reform which may be necessary.
Practise by Solicitors as Unlimited Companys
The Council were advised by Counsel that
solicitors
could not practise in the form of an unlimited com-
pany. The Council accepted that this advice was cor-
rect.
Solicitor devoted to wholetime Legal Aid Project
The Council approved of a newly qualified
solicitor
setting up a free legal advice project on the basis that
he was restricted to acting on an advisory capacity for
a limited period, after which the matter will be re-
viewed.
THE SOCIETY
Proceedings of the Council
50