The Gazette 1977

GAZ T I I H

JANUARY/FEBRUARY IV77

Correspondence

"Constructive notice" appears twice as "Construction notice", and "exist" in the last paragraph appears as "assist". My apologies to your readers. Yours faithfully, Garrett Gill

1 Rowe Street, Wexford. 14th February, 1977

Re: Family Home Protection Act 1976 Dear Sir, I would like to emphasise the point made in the article by Mr. Garrett Gill S.C. (1976 Gazette, page 209) relating to Section 3(1) of this Act. This section makes it clear that unless made to a purchaser in good faith for lull value, uny conveyance by one spouse without the prior consent in writing of the other of a family home is vo'd. It must follow that all other conveyances deriving from this, are also void for the simple reason that no interest can pass under a void conveyancc. Accordingly, the purported exemptions in sub-clauses (b) and (c) of sub-section 3(a) of the Act, are traps for the unwary. These sub-clauses give the impression that a conveyance of a family home, not made by one of the spouses, is good in certain circumstances. In other words, any subsequent conveyance in a chain complying with the conditions (purchaser for full value, etc.) is good. This is not so as Mr. Gill points out and if the original Conveyance is void, nothing can save the others stemming from it. It is a serious objection to the Act to find that there is no "provision to enable a spouse to give a subsequent consent and so remedy a situation which may have arisen Purely through inadvertence. As Mr. Gill says, this Act requires urgent amendment. Yours faithfully, T. J. Kirwan 4, St. John's Park, Mounttown, Dun Laoghaire, Co. Dublin. 18th February, 1977 Re: Family Home Protection Act, 1976 Dear Sir, Thank you for shewing me Mr. Kirwan's letter on this Act. One of the worst features of the Act will become most manifest some years hence, when there have been several conveyancing transactions affecting the same Property after the passing of the Act. If any one of these transactions, which required the prior written consent of a s Pouse, was effected without such consent it was void unless the conveyance was for full value to a purchaser in good faith. But how can one possibly be certain that a Prior purchaser acted in good faith and had not got notice °f some fact that prevented him from being a purchaser in good faith? A bas'c principle of equity is that a purchaser m good faith from the vendor to him is not put on enquiry a s to whether or not every prior purchaser was a Purchaser in good faith. He is only affected by equities of w hich he himself has notice, actual or constructive. Section 3 of this Act alters that position completely and ^»11 make the title of the most bona fide prchaser, advised b > the most careful solicitor, uncertain if there have been several intermediate conveyances executed since the Passing of this Act. If any one of these conveyances is then no title passes under it. This seems to have been uuyond the comprehension of the draftsman of this Act. .1 regret to note that my bad writing has led to several Sprints in the Article on this Act in your last issue. 12

94 Lr. Baggot Street, Dublin 2. 11th February, 1977

Re: Report on Annual General Meeting Dear Sir, I refer to the report of the Annual General Meeting contained on pages 205-207 of the issue of the Gazette for December 1976. Certain statements are attributed therein to me which are incorrect. On page 205, it is incorrectly stated that I asked when telephone facilities would be available in Blackball Place. What I asked was whether the telephone facilities presently existing in the Solicitors' Buildings in the Four Courts would continue and be expanded. On pages 206 and 207, I am quoted as saying "if increases to Legal staff contemplated by the Law Clerk Joint Labour Committee are passed, the overheads will be practically wiped out, due to office expenses". This is inaccurate. What I, in fact said was that as a result of the proposed increases referred to, the overheads would increase to such an extent as to make it totally unprofitable for a Solicitor to continue in practice, taking into account that there is no corresponding increase granted in fees to meet such increased overheads. At the same time, I asked what progress had been made regarding the application for increases in our fees. Yours faithfully, Quentin Crivon V A C AN CY FOR POST OF A P P E AL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX IN THE OFFICE OF THE REVENUE COMMISSIONERS The Minister for Finance invites applications for appointment to a post of Appeal Commissioner of Income Tax. The post at present carries a salary of £10,023 a year (married). The post is pensionable. Candidates musi be practising Barristers or Solicitors in the State of not less than six years' standing. Application forms and conditions of service for the post may be obtained from the Secretary, Department of Finance, (Personnel Section), Upper Merrion Street, Dublin 2. Completed Applications should be sent to the same address to arrive not later than 5.30 p.m. on 22nd March 1977. Note: Persons who applied in response to the previous advertisement need not re-apply.

Department of Finance, Upper Mcrrion Street, Dublin 2. 17 February 1977