18 / 266
Walker, John R. Halpin, Derrick M. Martin,
Dermot P. Shaw, Joseph Barrett, John B. McCann,
James J. O’Connor, Patrick R. Boyd, John J.
Nash, George G. Overend, John L. Kealy, Francis
J. Lanigan, William J. Norman, Joseph Morrissey,
T. A. Buckley, Henry St. J. Blake, Joseph P. Lynch,
Thomas A. O’Reilly, John J. Sheil, Senator O’Reilly,
John Carrigan.
The following was among the business trans
acted :—
Incidence o f costs as between vendor and
purchaser
M
embers
had written to the Society stating that
clients had been required to sign conditions o f sale
o f property by public auction containing a clause
that the purchaser should pay the costs o f the
vendor’s solicitor and all costs and expenses o f and
incidental to the sale. It was decided to draw the
attention of the solicitors concerned to the opinion
of the Council expressed in the Society’ s
G
azette
for May, 1951, which is reprinted in the current
issue.
Conditions o f Sale. Clause that vendor’s
solicitor will prepare conveyance
T
he
attention of the Council was drawn to a clause
in conditions of sale which provided that the con
veyance would be prepared by the vendor’s solicitors.
The Council expressed the opinion that it is,
prima
facie,
unprofessional for a solicitor acting for a
vendor to introduce into the conditions o f sale a
clause that the conveyance to the property will be
prepared by the vendor’s solicitor.
The long
standing custom of the profession is that the con
veyance should be prepared by the purchaser’s
solicitor who is responsible for protecting the
purchaser’s interests. There may be special cir
cumstances which would justify the insertion of a
clause to the contrary effect in the conditions o f
sale, but they are unusual. The inference to be
drawn from such a clause is that the vendor’s
solicitor is willing to act for the purchaser. In a
case in which the purchaser is separately represented
the effect of such a stipulation is that the purchaser’s
solicitor will not be entitled to charge the com
mission scale fee.
Insurance Companies and retainer o f solicitors
in negligence cases
T
he
Council passed the following resolution:—
“ While acknowledging the right o f an
insurance company to retain any solicitor or
firm o f its choice to transact legal business
arising on claims against its insured, the
Council considers that the companies should
accept the principle that where there is an
established relationship o f solicitor and client,
and where the client so requests, a company
should retain the solicitor o f the insured for
such business unless the company considers
that there are special circumstances necessitating
the employment of another solicitor.”
Irish and English solicitors. Agency com
mission
T
he
Council considered correspondence between
ffip Society and the Law Society, London, on the
subject of the effect o f the English Solicitors’ Pro
fessional Practice Rules, 1933, on the allowance of
agency commission to Irish solicitors. Members
o f the English Law Society had enquired whether
the allowance of such commission is prohibited by
the statutory regulations. Following correspondence
between the two Societies it has been agreed that
each Council approves o f the mutual allowance of
the usual agency commission between Irish and
English solicitors.
Small Dwellings (Acquisition) Acts and costs
M
embers
enquired whether any reduction should
be made in the costs payable by a purchaser-
mortgagor in a case in which a plot o f ground was
purchased for £90 and a loan of £1,500 was obtained
from the Local Authority under the Small Dwellings
(Acquisition) Acts for the erection o f a dwelling-
house. The opinion of the Council was that the
scale fee should be charged in respect o f the mortgage
and that the solicitor acting for the purchaser-
mortgagor would be entitled to charge a nominal
fee in respect o f the purchase. In a case in which a
solicitor acts for a purchaser-mortgagor, the con
sideration for the purchase being equal to or greater
than the amount o f the advance on mortgage, the
Council’s opinion is that the solicitor acting for the
purchaser-mortgagor should charge the scale fee
on the purchase and would be entitled to charge a
reduced fee in respect of the mortgage.
Estate Duty Office and valuation for death
duties
T
he
Council considered correspondence between
a member and the Estate Duty Office from which it
appears that the value o f leasehold property returned
in the Inland Revenue affidavit was referred by the
Estate Duty Office to the Valuation Office for a
report. The Controller o f Death Duties subsequently
wrote to the solicitor for the executors stating that
a report had been received from the Valuation
Office in respect o f the leasehold property included
in Form 77 and returned therein at £500, and that