The Gazette 1977

ga z e t te

MARCH 1977

DUBLIN SOLICITORS' BAR ASSOCIATION

Mr. David Pigot of Arthur Cox & Company, then read a Paper on Insurance from the Solicitors' standpoint and mentioned a number of matters of practical and procedural importance. Among these, he raised the question of whether the cost of a wake could be recovered as part of Special Damages! The discussion following the two Papers was opened by Mr. Nat Lacy, who argued that the time had come to revise the whole question of running-down procedure and that in particular, the summons, as such, should be abolished and that Pleadings should be confined to a very full Statement of Claim and a Defence. He further suggested that a great deal of the spade work involved, including the agreement of medical reports etc. could be done befor the Master instead of in open Court. Mr. Lacy received a spontaneous round of applause for the contentious statement that"solicitors should not be slaves to the Bar Library" and he suggested that more of us should be prepared to take on our own advocacy. Mr. Desmond Moran referred to the procedure of the Notice to Admit and suggested that this device was insufficiently used in modern practice. Mr. Moran also made a more revolutionary suggestion, as to the use of motion film for evidential purposes in Court proceedings instead of still photos. ' Extending the earlier remarks on the subject of failure to wear safety belts, Mr. Moran commented that listening to car radios might also amount to contributory negligence! Mr. Moran concluded his remarks by quoting the Obiter of the United States Supreme Court, which had commented favourably on the subject of the speed and relative inexpense of the British (and, presumably, the Irish) Court systems! Another member suggested that a second Senior Counsel might be unnecessary in certain Actions, to which David Pigot replied that if only one Senior was employed, he might well charge as much as two! The evening was as enjoyable as it was educative and it is to be hoped that it will be but the first of many. DUBLIN CITY AND COUNTY SHERIFFS For a considerable time, the Practice and Procedure Sub-Committee of the Association has been considering the increasingly difficult matter of obtaining Returns from the Dublin City and County Sheriffs. It may be helpful to practitioners to note that the Sub- Committee has been advised by the City and County Sheriffs that the average length of time which may be expected to elapse between the date of lodgment of a Decree and the receipt by the practitioner of a Return is as follows: 1. Where there are no seizable goods and a Return of "No Goods" is made - two to three months; 2. where Execution can be levied without the necessity of a seizure—four months; 3. where Execution can only be levied by means of a seizure and sale—four to six months. In view of this unsatisfactory position, the Association is continuing to explore the possibility of obtaining greater expedition in the making of Returns by the City and County Sheriffs. The Sub-Committee, in its correspondence with the City and County Sheriffs, has elicited the following 4 3

"THE MOTOR INSURANCE CLAIM" As already advertised, the Association broke new ground when its Activities Sub-Committee presented a meeting on the subject of "The Motor Insurance Claim", in the Library of the Incorporated Law Society on the 19th January. Mr. Liam Collins, of The Insurance Corporation of Ireland, opened the proceedings with a very erudite, informative and amusing Paper on the Motor Insurance Claim, as seen from behind the Insurance Company desk. Among a number of interesting matters, Mr. Collins mentioned that the current estimates before the Motor Insurers' Bureau, in respect of claims not covered by proper insurance, amount to something in the region of £2,000,000—unfortunately, the funding of this bill must inevitably fall upon the law-abiding majority of motorists, through increased insurance premiums. Mr. Collins also ventilated the perennial questions of the lack of vigilance in detecting uninsured motorists and of the inadequacies of Court fines imposed for failure to insure and tax cars—as he pointed out, the fine imposed by District Courts in this respect is usually considerably less than the cost of insurance and road tax and it is arguably a sound economic proposition for motorists to decline to insure and tax their cars and risk periodic prosecution. Referring to another matter calculated to give rise to difficulties, Mr. Collins remarked that insurance companies did their best to adopt a flexible attitude towards the question of car hire, but they were not, at the same time, prepared to lay themselves open to abuse in this respect. In the case of a vehicle so damaged as to require a fairly short period for repair, insurance companies would normally agree to pay the cost of car hire for a replacement vehicle for a "reasonable period" in relation to the anticipated length of repair; if an insured's car is a complete write off, then an insurance company might be expected to agree to car hire for a period of up to say, two weeks, to enable all arrangements being made to secure a replacement vehicle. Despite Mr. Collins' remarks on this subject, members of the profession may have found, from time to time, that it is not always as easy as this! Another of Mr. Collins' remarks calculated to raise eyebrows, was that the Insurance Companies in general found it more profitable to admit liability in cases where their investigations indicated their clients' culpability and, rather than engage in tactics, the insurers should move for an expeditious settlement, thus defeating inflation, cutting overheads, and hopefully, leaving all parties happy! While this may be true of certain companies, at least one member of the audience, in the discussion which followed, remarked to Mr. Collins that the profession's experience did not necessarily support this statement! Among other useful matters of professional interest Mr. Collins mentioned in particular the recent decision that failure to wear a safety belt amounted to contributory negligence. He also stressed the desirability of becoming Plaintiff rather than Defendant in any running down proceedings. In fact, as he put it, "there should be a race to become Plaintiff'. Finally, Mr. Collins made the very important point, not widely realised, that depreciation is nowadays substantially disregarded in insurance claims.