353 / 364
REGISTRATION OF TITLE ACTS, 1891 and 1942
Issue of New Land Certificate
Applications have been received from the registered
owners mentioned in the Schedule annexed hereto, for
the issue of Certificates of Title in substitution for the
original Certificates issued in respect of the lands speci
fied in the said Schedule, which original Certificates, it
is alleged, have been lost or inadvertently destroyed.
A new Certificate will be issued in each case, except
a case in respect of which notification is received in
the Registry within 28 days from the publication of this
notice, that the Certificate of Title is still in existence,
and in
the custody of some person other
than
the
registered owner. Any such notification should state the
grounds on which such Certificate is being held.
Dated the 2nd day of May, 1967.
Central Office,
Land Registry,
Chancery Street,
DUBLIN.
D. L. McALLISTER,
Registrar of Titles.
SCHEDULE
1. Registered Owner, John O'Keeffe. Folio number
2278R. County Limerick. Lands of Garrane in the Barony
of Glenquin, containing 2 la. 2r. 5p.
2. Registered Owner, Nicholas Fennelly. Folio number
4007. County Kilkenny. Lands of Grangecuffe and
Brownstown in the Barony of Shillelogher, containing
lla.
3r.
23p.
3. Registered Owner, John Maguire. Folio number
5573. County Louth. Lands of Haggardstown in
the
Barony of Dundalk Upper, containing Oa.
Ir. Op.
4. Registered Owner, Patrick O'Connor. Folio num
ber 36054. County Tipperary. Lands of Lisheen in the
Barony of Eliogarty, containing 72a. 3r. 35p.
5. Registered Owner, John Keating. Folio number
2833. County Wexford. Lands of Ballyboy in the Barony
of Forth, containing 12a. Ir. 8p.
CORESPONDENCE
40 Dawson Street,
Dublin, 2.
8th March, 1967.
Dear Sir,
We are writing to draw your attention to a practice
which is frequently adopted in the profession and upon
which the Society may think it appropriate to give its
recommendations:—
(1) It is, or has become, customary on selling property
by auction to offer a title commencing with a recent
Lease or Sub-Lease and to preclude all investigation
of prior title. In recent cases where we were acting
for prospective purchasers
the
title offered con
sisted of a Lease about
ten years old and
the
conditions precluded investigation of the prior title,
notwithstanding the fact that perfectly good and
acceptable prior title appeared to be available.
(2) We
suggest
that
this practice
is unfair
to
the
Vendor who may lose a sale or suffer a loss in
price. We suggest that it is unfair to the Purchaser
who must either refuse to bid or take a chance on
the
title. We
suggest
that
it
is unfair
to
the
Purchasers solicitor who is precluded from securing
adequate title for his client and compelled to carry
out a superficial and rushed examination of title
prior to auction.
(3) May we suggest that the Society should issue a
recommendation as
to
the minimum
title which
should be offered on a sale by Public Auction in a
case where documents shwoing adequate title are
in the possession of the Vendor.
Yours faithfully,
ELLIS & MOLONEY.
Solicitors.
Note:
The attention of members is drawn to the statement
of the Society at page 248 of the Members' Handbook
disapproving of unduly restrictive practices on the sale
of property and stating that it is the professional duty
of a solicitor to see that the client receives a proper
marketable title. Attention is also drawn to the decision
of the Court of Appeal in England in Hill v Harris
and another (1956 2A11 E.R. 358) in which the Court
stated that it was not easy
to see what conceivable
defence a solicitor acting for a purchaser would have
to a claim for damages for negligence for failing to take
the ordinary conveyancing precaution before allowing
the client to take a sub-lease or finding out by inspection
of the head
lease whether there were any covenants
restrictive of user. The Council has taken the opinion
of
senior counsel who advise
the Society
that
this
decision would to his opinion be followed in the Irish
Courts and that accordingly a solicitor for an intending
lessee or sub-lessee
should ensure
that any unusual
covenants are disclosed and brought to the attention of
his client.—
Editor.
re: Succession Act, 1965
Dear Mr. Plunkett,
I would be obliged if you would draw the attention
of your members to:—
(1) the provisions of section 54 of the Succession Act,
1965 and particularly to subsection 2(c);
(2) to the notes at the foot of the forms in the Land
registration Rules, 1966 in relatnon to transmissions
on the death of the registered owner on or after
the 1st June, 1959.
Solicitors should adhere strictly to the prescribed forms.
Failure
to use
them will result in application being
returned.
No Will, Settlement or Deed of Release on such
deaths will be read or interpreted by the Land Registry
Legal Staff. This is now the sole responsibility of the
applicants legal advisers.
Yours faithfully,
D. McALLISTER,
Registrar.
Land Registry, Central Office,
Chancery Street,
Dublin 7.
9th March, 1967.
139