The Gazette 1964/67

propose any serious modification in established precedents and it will, further, be used in more or less the same way and for the same purposes as the earlier sections. In the circumstances, it would not appear that an amendment of section 4 on the lines suggested in your letters is necessary." PAYMENT OF PURCHASE PRICE IN LAND BONDS Solicitors acting for owners whose lands are compulsorily acquired by the Land Commission are expressing increasing concern at the fact that clients are finding difficulty in realising their security on the Stock Exchange. It is an accepted consitiutional and legal principle that where the State compulsorily acquires property of the citizen it should be on terms of full compensation in money or money's worth. The principle under lying the land purchase scheme since its incep tion has been that the owner of the land on making title receives payment in Land Bonds instead of cash. Payment by bonds applies to the price of the land as fixed or agreed and the owner's legal costs of the transaction. By an agreement made between the Minister for Lands and the Auctioneers' Association some years ago auctioneers who are instrumental in negotiating a sale between the owner and the Land Com mission receive their commission in cash instead of Land Bonds. The amount of 6 per cent Land Bonds now in issue is £5,168,000. During the years 1958-60 the price varied between 101£ and 102. Between 1961 and 1962 the price varied between 99 and 93^. Market value recovered to around par in the year 1964 but for the last twelve months the price has been steadily dropping and now stands at 87£. Market values are no doubt affected by the recent Government 6f per cent Loan which has tended to depreciate the value of stocks bearing a lower rate of interest. The present position is that an owner whose lands are compulsorily acquired for say £10,000 is receiving payment in bonds depreciated by almost 13 per cent of the purchase price. The bonds are not redeemable on any fixed date, re demption depending upon drawings for payment at par in cash on the lottery principle. An even more serious aspect of the present system is that there is a very small and unsatis factory market for the sale of these bonds on the Stock Exchange and owners whose lands have been acquired for payment in bonds have found 64 these long

lapses if the Corporation's conditions are not ful filled within three months. Since the recent credit squeeze the Corporation have been insisting strictly on the time limit and they withdraw the loan when the time limit expires. The result is that some clients have been unable to get credit which is sometimes due to the solicitor's delay. In one case which has come to the attention of the Society the Corporation offered to grant the loan after the term of three months lapsed but at a new rate of interest to wit 1\ per cent instead of 6 per cent. Members ought to be aware of these circumstances as there is the danger of negligence actions arising out of cases such as that referred to. PROFESSIONAL PRIVILEGE The following is the text of a letter of 27th October, 1965 addressed by the Society to the Department of Local Government in connection with provision of Section 4 of the Housing Bill 1965. "The Council of this Society are somewhat concerned at the provisions of Section 4 of the Housing Bill 1965. This section would apparently enable the Housing Authority to require a solicitor to furnish confidential information regarding a. client's affairs without that client's consent. This is contrary to the accepted law and the recognized right of clients to professional secrecy on the part of their solicitors. The Council wish to sub mit that the section should be amended to protect that right. If necessary, they are prepared to attend on the Ministers to supply further inform ation." The Society received the following letter in reply from the Department of Local Govern ment on the 22nd November, 1965 :— "I am directed by the Minister for Local Government to refer to your letters (EAP. L/5/65) of 27th October, and 5th November about section 4 of the Housing Bill, 1965, which enables a housing authority to require certain information and to point out that the section is similar to section 30 of the Housing (Miscellaneous Pro visions) Act, 1931, which was, in turn, made applicable by section 10 of the Local Government (No. 2) Act, 1960, to the compulsory acquisition of land by a local authority for the purpose of any of their powers and duties. It is also similar to section 9 of the Local Government (Planning and Development) Act, 1963, about which you wrote to the Department on 2nd January, 1963. The section as included in the Bill does not