79 / 338
to the Society which could be used as the basis of a
further submission, at the same time giving per
mission to the Society to cite the actual cases.
STATUTORY NOTICE TO CREDITORS
DEBTS DUE TO THE STATE
WE are indebted to members of the Society who
have forwarded correspondence with the Revenue
Commissioners and a copy of counsel's opinion on
the question whether a personal representative who
publishes a statutory notice to creditors in accordance
with Lord St. Leonard's act is protected against
personal liability for income tax or any other debt
due to the State of which he has not received notice.
Letters of administration with will annexed were
granted to the personal representative on ijth July,
1957. The statutory notice to creditors was published
on October 9th and i6th, 1957, and the estate was
finally distributed on 8th March, 1958, among
beneficiaries all of whom resided abroad. On 26th
March, 1958, the solicitors for the personal re
presentative received a notice from the inspector of
taxes claiming a sum due by the deceased in respect
of income tax for the year 1956-57. No previous
intimation had been received by
the personal
representative or his solicitors.
The inspector of
taxes on being asked to supply authority for the
demand wrote as follows, " I am directed by the
Revenue Commissioners to state that the authority
for the proposition that the State is not bound by
a notice given under the 29th section of the statute
22 and 23 Vie. cap. 35, is section 35 of the Finance
Act 1924.
Sub-section (i) thereof provides (inter
alia) that every sum due in respect of tax on duty
under the care and management of the Revenue
Commissioners shall be deemed to be a debt to the
Minister for Finance for the benefit of the Central
Fund.
Sub-section 2 thereof provides that monies
due or payable to or for the benefit of the Central
Fund shall have, and be deemed always to have had
attached to them, all such rights, priority and
privileges as theretofore attached to debts due to
the Crown. One of the Crown rights of privileges
in respect of (inter alia) debts due to it was that it
was not bound by any statute unless in the relevant
statutory provision it is expressly or by necessary
implication referred to. An exhaustive list of the
authorities for this long established proposition will
be found in the loth edition of Maxwell on the
Interpretation of Statutes at pages 135 et seq."
Members took
the opinion of counsel on the
question who advised that the State is entitled to
the benefit of the perogative of the Crown. Accord
ingly the State is not bound by statutes passed by
its Parliament unless such statutes are expressly
applied to it, or it is necessarily implied in the terms
of the statute that they were intended to apply to
or bind the State (Cork County Council and another
v. the Commissioners of Public Works and others,
1945. I.R. 561). Section 29 of Lord St. Leonard's
Act provided in effect that if an executor gives the
sort of notice to creditors that would have been
given under the old form of decree in Chancery,
then he is entitled to distribute the estate and is
protected from any further claims by creditors of
whose claims he has not received notice. Counsel
said that the Court of Chancery was originally the
court of the Lord Chancellor, The Court of the
King's conscience and that it might well be arguable
that since the jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery
came directly from the King that to suggest that
the Crown, or in Ireland the State, is not bound by
something which pertains of the nature of an order
by the King himself would be untenable. On the
the other hand the modern trend of authority seems
to suggest that if the application of an act of Parlia
ment to the Crown would divest it of any Crown
property or interest or right, the court would not
in the absence of express words in the statute make
the necessary implication. Here the application of
Lord St. Leonard's Act would deprive the Crown of
its claim against the executor but not against the
beneficiary. Counsel was of the opinion that the
chances as to which side the decision would fall
are about equal.
DUBLIN SOLICITORS' BAR
ASSOCIATION
A MEETING of the Council was held on Wednesday
3rd December, 1958. The method of appointment
of Circuit Court Civil Bill Officers and District
Court Process Servers and the performance of their
duties by these officials were further considered.
The Meeting also considered the suspension of
publication of Messrs. Thorn's Directory. As that
Directory is a valuable source of information which
ought to be kept up to date and frequently consulted,
members are recommended to write to Messrs.
Thorn, and obtain, complete, and return to them
their questionary. This will help the publishers in
deciding on future publication.
The next Meeting of the Council was fixed for
Wednesday, 7th January, 1959.
A MEETING of the Council was held on Wednesday
7th January, 1959.
A letter from the Law Society referring to certain
builders' advertisements, and to articles in the press,
and their tendency towards the exclusion of a
solicitor a,cting for purchasers, was considered. One
7J