70 / 300
a
suitor's f und, the costs of the appeals would come
from public money.
The I^aw Society, which was asked by Lord Hailsham
its views on the Justice proposals, says the fund
should cover costs incurred in obtaining an Appeal
Court decision reversing or varying a lower court judg-
ment which was wrong in law or fact or both.
Initially payments from the fund should be limited
10
proceed ings in the House of Lords, the Court of
appeal and the Divisional Courts.
Like Justice, the Law Society says the fund would be
available in cases where a judge finds himself bound by
P
r e c
e d e nt even though he might wish to give a
different decision.
It would also indemnify parties for the costs of a
Hal which had to be abandoned because of the illness
^r death of the judge before he had time to give his
decision,
p
tosent system leads to hardship and injustice
At present in long and expensive cases, litigants might
a
ke out insurance against such risks but this was not
apl
expense a litigant should be required to incur, says
de Law Society. Independently of any suitor's fund,
Pe Treasury should accept costs thrown away in these
Cl
rcumstances.
There was no doubt, says the Law Society, that the
Present "winner takes all" costs rule could result in real
hardship and injustice, particularly to those not rich
enough to absorb the cost nor able to take advantage of
he social and protective benefits of legal aid.
Some complex legal issue might arise requiring
judicial interpretation of a new statutory provision, but
the risk of liability for costs at the trial and on possible
appeal prevents recourse to the courts which should be
available.
"This situation is exacerbated where the issue in-
volved, is of public importance and the result would
benefit the community generally."
It is suggested that finance for a suitors' f und should
come from a levy on court fees but no estimate of the
cost is made by the Law Society.
Prior assurance required of appellate costs
While Justice proposed that the court after a hearing
of an appeal should decide whether costs should be
indemnified from the suitors' fund, the Law Society
feels that an appellant should have a prior assurance
of having his costs covered before bringing an appeal.
It suggests that a prospective appellant should be
able to apply to an independent national committee for
a certificate for payment of his costs from the fund.
Even if refused by the committee, the Appeal Court
would have to grant a certificate retrospectively.
Both individuals and corporate bodies would be able
to apply for certificates.
Criminal cases should not need to be covered by such
a fund, says the Law Society, because of the recent
direction to the courts by Lord Widgery, the Lord
Chief Justice.
Under this an accused, acquitted on trial or on
appeal, and whether legally aided or not, should be
able to recover his costs out of public f unds except in
certain circumstances.
Notice—Solicitors may take additional
Apprentices
. The Society is conscious of the difficult problem of
ln
tending apprentices in obtaining masters. In these
special and exceptional circumstances, the Court of
Examiners is prepared as a temporary measure, to
c
9
n
sider applications for second apprentices from Soli-
ctors generally. The Society is also prepared as an
e
^ e p t i o n al measure to consider applications from soli-
ctors of 5 to 7 years standing to take apprentices.
James J. Ivers (
Director General)
LAW AGENT
Cavan County Council
Salary: £4,672 • £5,483. Higher Initial salary in certain
circumstances.
Essential: Admission and enrolment as a solicitor in the
state and eight years satisfactory experience including
of court work.
Secretary, Local Appointments Commission
45 Upper O'Connell Street, Dublin 1.
For application forms and further particulars write to:
Latest date for receiving completed application forms:
25th April 1974
100