99 / 266
Vol. 47
No. 2
June,
1953
THE GAZETTE
o f the
INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY OF IRELAND
President
J
ambs
R . Q
u irks
Vice-Presidents
Secretary
J
ohn
C
arrigan
E
ric
A . P
lunkett
J
ames
J . O ’C
onnor
FOR CIRCULATION AMONG MEMBERS
MEETINGS OF THE COUNCIL
J
une
iit h
,
1953- The President in the Chair.
Also present: Messrs. John Carrigan and James J.
O’Connor,
Vice-Presidents,; Francis J. Gearty,
Christopher E. Callan, Thomas A. O’Reilly, John
Maher, Peter E. O’Connell, John R. Halpin, Derrick
M. Martin, Ralph J. Walker, George G. Overend,
Patrick R. Boyd, Desmond J. Collins, Niall S.
Gaffney, Arthur Cox, Francis J. Lanigan, William
J. Norman, Gerald J. O’Donnell, Desmond J.
Mayne, Desmond R. Counahan, Joseph P. Tyrrell,
Joseph Barrett, Patrick F. O’Reilly, John J. Sheil,
Sean
0
hUadhaigh.
The following was among the business trans
acted :—
Uncompleted
business. Submission
to
arbitration.
A. & co. acted for the vendor on a sale of registered
land by private treaty for the sum o f £100. A
deposit of £20, was paid to the vendor’s solicitors on
the signing o f the contract which provided that
the vendor would furnish sufficient title to enable
equities to be discharged. After title had been
deduced and investigated, but before the draft
transfer had been submitted for approval, the con
tract was rescinded by agreement on the terms,
inter alia
, that the purchaser should pay the vendor’s
costs down to the date of the rescission o f the con
tract. The vendor’s solicitors furnished a bill
which included a sum of £ 10 , professional charges
as if the sale had been completed. The purchaser
objected and suggested a fee of £4. 4- °- as sufficient.
The vendor’s solicitors then submitted a detailed
bill which substantially exceeded the sum of £ 10 .
The question was submitted for the opinion o f the
Council as to the proper charges. The Council
decided that the business was uncompleted within
the meaning o f the Solicitors’ Remuneration
General Order 1884, clause
z[c),
and that the charges
were regulated by the old system as altered by
Schedule 2. The fact that the vendor’s solicitors
first submitted a bill for the sum of £ 10 did not
alter the position as it was rejected by the purchaser’s
solicitors. (Re Nabarro, 59 T .L.R . 24).
11