The Gazette 1944-46

LAND REGISTRY. THE following statement is published at the request of the Registrar of Titles :— (1) Missing Documents :—It has been brought to the notice of the Registrar that in a number of applications for first registration and for can cellation of notice of equities, a document of title, which is stated by the applicant to have been lost, is subsequently traced in reply to a requisition by the Registry requiring evidence of the efforts made to locate the missing document and sug gesting possible lines of inquiry. This suggests that some solicitors do not make adequate inquiries for missing documents before lodging applications. Such an omission results in unnecessary correspondence and consequential delay in completion of registration. It is not the function of the Examiner in the Registry to detail the steps to be taken by solici tors to trace missing documents. Exhaustive inquiries, such as inquiries at Banks and at Offices of former Solicitors who acted for the owners should be made before applications are lodged ; and the inquiries made to trace the missing documents and the results thereof, should be stated in the application or in a separate affidavit filed with the application. Inspection of the purchase agreement in the Land Commission or of the Memorial in the Registry of Deeds (where the lost Deed was registered therein) will often show the name of the solicitor who acted for the parties at the time and who may have knowledge of the probable where abouts of the missing document. If the solicitor who acted for the owner when the purchase agreement was signed or the deed registered is dead or has retired from business, enquiries should be made from the solicitor who subsequently acquired his practice and documents. By observing the procedure indicated above, solicitors will obviate the issuing of Rulings which should not be necessary and which cause delay in the completion of the transaction. (2) Rejection of Dealings:—The Registrar desires to call the attention of Practitioners to the fact that notwithstanding the "Memorandum on Practice" issued by the Registry in May, 1944, a number of Dealings have still to be rejected on the preliminary examination through some defect in the documents presented for registration. A close attention to the instructions in the Memor andum and reference to the appropriate provisions of Land Registration Rules 1937 and 1944 would obviate most of the defects disclosed and prevent the delay and inconvenience of rejection.

Neither could there be criticism of applications for costs in letters demanding the discontinuance of unlawful interference with proprietory rights, such as patent or copyright, and intimating that proceedings will be stayed on an under taking by the trespasser to discontinue the inter ference and to indemnify the aggrieved party against costs. The judicial dicta in Alien v. O'Callaghan were limited to cases of simple applications for immediate payment of liquidated debts and have no application to cases where a stay of proceedings is the consideration for a fresh contract between the parties. Finally, it is of interest to note that the trend of professional opinion elsewhere is in accordance with the opinions expressed by Chief Baron Palles and Baron Dowse in 1873. In 1898 the Council of the English Law Society expressed the opinion that the practice of applying for a small sum for the costs of a debt collecting letter was common and not unprofessional. In. 1930, after reconsidering the matter, the Council of the Law Society withdrew the opinion of 1898 and published a notice deprecating the practice of demanding such costs and urging solicitors to abandon it. The Council of the Incorporated Law Society of Northern Ireland recently published an opinion to the same effect. \ • LAND REGISTRATION FEE ORDER 1944. As members were informed in previous issues of the GAZETTE, the Minister for Justice, following upon the representations which were made by the Council as to the injurious effect of the above Fee Order, appointed a Committee under the Chairmanship of Mr. H. B. O'Hanlon, Taxing Master of the High Court to investigate and, report to him upon the effects of the Order and as to whether any changes in the new scales are called for. The representatives of the Council on the Committee were the President and Mr. John B. Hamill: the other representatives being Civil Servants. The Committee met on a number of occasions and eventually submitted a majority and a minority report to the Minister. The minority report was signed by. the representatives of the Council. The Council has received notification that the Minister has decided to adopt the views expressed in the majority report and that no change in the scale of fees imposed by the Land Registration Fees Order. 1944, will be made. The matter will be placed on the Agenda for the next meeting of the Council which will be held on October 5th.

34