184 / 266
member of the Council has given unsparingly of
his time in the interest of the profession and the
Society is a fact that I hope is appreciated by all.
At the same time it would be unfair not to acknow
ledge the fact that we are greatly indebted to various
Bar Associations throughout the country who in
many o f the matters here reviewed, kept in close
touch with us and showed their willingness to
work for what we hope to be the good o f the
profession. All these efforts would have been vain
were it not for the ever ready assistance o f Mr.
Plunkett and his willing staff. Our indebtedness
to them should be here and now publicly acknow
ledged. Your patience in listening to me has won
my admiration, and I can only hope that my efforts
to serve you will meet with your approval.”
Mr. F. A. Gibney asked for information on the
subject of the proposed Conference o f the Inter
national Bar Association which had been abandoned.
The representatives o f the press having left the
meeting, the President made a statement on the
subject, with which Mr. Gibney declared himself
to be perfectly satisfied.
On the motion o f Mr. James G. O’Connor, the
Chair was taken by Mr. Nash, Vice-President. Mr.
O’Connor then moved, and Mr. Desmond Moran
seconded a vote o f thanks to the President for his
address to the meeting, and for his services to the
Society during the past six months. The Vice-
President associated himself with the vote which
was put to the meeting and carried, with acclamation.
The President briefly replied and the proceedings
then terminated.
PRESENTATION OF ADMISSION
CERTIFICATES.
O
n
the 13th May, 1954, the President presented
certificates to the following newly admitted solicit
ors :—Mathias Buchalter, B.A. (Mod.) LL .B .,
“ Kintullagh, 3 Gracefield Road, Artane, Co.
Dublin; George H. Crawford, 66 Dundela Park
Sandycove Co. Dublin ; Finbar P. J. MacCarthy,
B.A . (N.U.I.) Kinnegad, Co. Westmeath; John
Michael O’Connor, B.A. (N.U.I.), 2 Clyde Road,
Dublin; Donal Brendan O’Connell, Ballingulley
House, Ballincollig, Co. Cork.
LANDLORD AND TENANT ACT,
19 3 1 .
Costs o f Renewal Leases.
I
t
has been decided by the Taxing Masters that in
general a renewal o f a lease made pursuant to the
Landlord and Tenant Act 19 31, as amended, is not
a lease at a rack rent and that therefore the scale of
costs applicable is the scale for a lease at less than
a rack rent. Accordingly the Council is o f the
opinion that solicitors should charge the higher
scale in such cases unless the rent charged on the
renewal lease can clearly be shown to be a rack rent.
It is realised that in the case o f large rents the higher
scale of costs is out o f proportion and so, in such
cases or where there are special circumstances, the
Council will not consider that a solicitor is under
cutting if he elects to charge on the scale applicable
to leases at rack rent.
INCOME TAX CHILD
ALLOWANCE.
S
ome
years ago the Council made representations
to the Revenue Commissioners in support o f the
claim for the income tax child allowance in favour
o f the parent o f a solicitor’s apprentice serving
under indentures. The Commissioners held that
a solicitor’ s apprentice did not come within the
relevant statutory provisions and that the claim
could not be conceded, having regard to the pro
visions o f the Finance Act, 1920, section 21. There
are no legislative provisions in force in the Republic
o f Ireland similar to the English Finance Act, 1928,
section 20 (See Heaslip
v.
Heasmear, 13 Tax cases,
212). The Society has received no official notifica
tion of any change in the attitude o f the Revenue
Commissioners, but the Council are aware o f three
cases since 1951, in which the claim has been
allowed by the Special Commissioners.
Judge
Conroy allowed an appeal against the refusal of
the claim in Cork last year, and in a recent case in
Dublin, the Special Commissioners allowed the
claim, the Inspector of Taxes having intimated that
he withdrew his opposition apparently on instruc
tions from his head office. The Secretary will give
further particulars to any member interested.
ydu
734
-
it
DECISIONS OF PROFESSIONAL
INTEREST.
Where a testator having appointed solicitors as executors
and trustees with the usual provision that they should he
paid their professional charges subsequently revoked the
appointment and appointed a Bank as executor without
declaring that the Bank should be entitled to charge was
the Bank in fa ct entitled to the customary scale o f charges
under the terms o f the Will and Codicil, or had the
Court a discretion to allow the charges ?
The answer to both questions appears to be in
the affirmative. The will contained a general power
authorising a professional trustee to charge for