The Gazette 1949-1952

to the draft memorandum were suggested and noted the memorandum was approved. Defence Bill, 1950 T he Secretary submitted a report on sections in the Bill which require consideration by the Council. Section 15 requires that the Judge Advocate- General shall be a Barrister-at-Law. It was suggested that solicitors should also be eligible for the appoint­ ment. Sections 32 and 33, dealing with the acquisi­ tion of land by agreement or compulsorily by the Minister for Defence, do not incorporate the pro­ visions of the Lands Clauses Acts and there is no provision for the payment o f the costs o f the owner o f deducing title in the case of compulsory acquisi­ tion. It-was decided that representations on these matters should be made and that the President and Secretary should seek an interview with the Secretary of the Department. January 11th T he President in the Chair : also present: Messrs. Francis J. Gearty, Vice-President; James J. O’Connor, James R. Quirke, Thomas A. O’Reilly, Laurence F. Branigan, William J. Norman, John J. Bolger, John J. Sheil, Henry St. J. Blake, John Carrigan, Joseph P. Tyrrell, John S. O’Connor, Daniel O’Connell, Louis E. O’Dea, John R. Halpin, Reginald J. Nolan, John J. Nash, Patrick F. O’Reilly. The following was among the business transacted : Tortfeasors Bill, 1950 T he Attorney General requested the observations of the Council on the Tortfeasors Bill, 1950, which was introduced in Seanad Eireann last month. The Bill is an Act to amend the law relating to proceedings against, and contribution between, tortfeasors, and it provides that where an injured person recovers judgment against a tortfeasor for damages in respect o f an injury by tort, the judgment shall not be a bar to an action by the injured person for damages in respect o f that injury against any other person, whether that other person is or is not alleged to be liable as joint tortfeasor with the original defendant. The Bill also contains provisions as to damages and costs where two or more tort­ feasors are sued separately, and apportionment of damages amongst tortfeasors inter se, and contribu­ tion between tortfeasors. The Bill had been referred to a Committee for their report and the Council now considered and adopted the report and directed that it should be sent to the Attorney General. Entries by solicitors in foreign directories O n a report from a Committee the Council decided

to issue an opinion as to the information which should be given in entries published by Irish solicitors in foreign law lists and directories. The opinion o f the Council is printed below. Measuring o f Costs T he Council considered a complaint from members that in a case in which they were concerned with Counsel their costs o f an application to the Court had been measured at an amount which was barely sufficient to cover Counsel’s fees and disbursements, leaving only a very small margin. It was not clear from the facts whether or not Counsel had expressly or by implication consented to the measuring of costs. The Secretary reported that from the records of the Society it appeared that on several occasions the Society has objected to the costs o f a party being measured without the consent o f the solicitor, or Counsel acting on the solicitor’s instructions. The Council decided to direct the attention of members to the fact that in general a solicitor is entitled to ask to have his costs taxed, and that the Court will not, in the absence o f consent, measure the costs. I f a solicitor has reason to believe that if the costs are measured an inadequate amount will be allowed his proper course is either to ask the Court for an order for taxation, or instruct Counsel to do so. A copy o f a resolution o f the Bar Council published at page 350 of the Irish Law Times and Solicitors'’ Journal, o f 12th December, 1914, • is printed below. MEASURING OF COSTS : RESOLUTION OF THE BAR COUNCIL T he following resolution of the Bar Council of Ireland was published at page 350 of the Irish Law Times Solicitors’ Journal, of 12th December, O H :— “ The Council wish to call the attention of the , Bar to Or. LXV , r. 25, of the Supreme Court Rules dealing with the measurement o f costs o f inter­ locutory applications and to inform the profession that this rule has of late not been strictly adhered to, with the result that in many cases the costs as measured by the Court do not even cover the solicitor’s outlay. “ The Council suggest that in future members of the Bar shall not ask the Court to measure the costs of interlocutory proceedings in which they represent the successful party without definite instructions, and that when they appear for the unsuccessful party they shall not ask to have the costs measured 48