The Gazette 1946-49

sec. 39 prohibits unqualified persons from drawing writs, and there is an excepting of a " public officer "; so apparently a public officer is qualified in sec. 38 but unqualified in sec. 39. Clearly the matter needs to be settled. In England the rule is that a solicitor who has agreed in con sideration of a salary to do the legal work of an employer who is not a solicitor may agree with such employer to credit his employer with fees and expenses recovered up to the extent of his salary and expenses and reasonable office expenses, the excess being retained by the solicitor. The Council has asked that, if possible, a similar rule should be introduced into the Solicitors Bill and the terms " public officer " and " public com pany " defined therein. (Scottish Law Gazette, June, 1947.) IN O'Donovan v. Cork County Council, 81 I.L.T.R. 133, the question in issue was whether the costs of the registration of title to cottages, acquired by the local authority in pursuance of improvement schemes, and the registration of transfers of labourers' cottages from one local authority to another, should be taxed by the special taxing officer appointed by the Minister for Local Government under Article 51 (e) of the Labourers (Ireland) Order, 1912, or by the Taxing Master of the High Court. The question turned on whether the original registra tion of the title and the registration of the transfers respectively were part of improvement schemes and it was held by the majority of the Court that no distinction could be drawn between the two groups and that the costs both of the registration of the title and of the registration of the transfers should be taxed by the Taxing Master of the High Court. IN the Matter of the Trusts of the Will and Codicil of Thomas Boyle, deceased, was reported unofficially in the Irish Law Times and Solicitors' Journal of October nth, 1947. This was a case on the subject of the inability of a solicitor-executor to recover costs in the event of his acting as a solicitor in the administration of the deceased's estate. Mr. A. was appointed executor under a will which contained no provision enabling him to charge or be paid any professional or other costs in the event of his acting as solicitor. On the death of the testator the executor appointed Mr. B. a solicitor practising in the same office but not as a partner of the solicitor executor. Mr. B. had in fact been abroad during the period of the administration of the estate and had appointed Mr. A. to act for him to carry on his business as a solicitor during his absence. In pursuance of this arrangement the professional work connected with the administration of the 44

dwelling give in the prescribed manner an infected premises notice to the owner of the dwelling, the occupier shall be guilty of an offence under this section and shall be liable on summary conviction thereof to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds or, at the discretion of the Court, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months or to both such fine and such imprisonment. Section 35. Where (a) a person either— (i) is concerned in selling or letting a dwelling or showing a dwelling with a view to its being sold or let, or (ii) has ceased during the preceding three months to occupy a dwelling, and (H) he is questioned by another person in terested in such sale or letting as to whether at any time during the preceding three months a person has resided in the dwelling while suffering from an infectious disease, and (f) he makes to the question an answer which is to his knowledge false or misleading in any material particular, he shall be guilty of. an offence under this section and shall be liable on summary conviction thereof to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds or, at the dis cretion of the Court, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months or to both such fine and such imprisonment. PROFESSIONAL ITEMS THE practice, common in America, of a Company (or Corporation, as it is there called), employing a full-time solicitor is becoming established in England, and has now begun to spread to Scotland. On the question being raised whether the Company was entitled to retain any fees recovered by the solicitor it was discovered that it was very doubtful whether the Solicitors (Scotland) Act, 1933, covered the case. Sec. 37 prohibits acting for the profit of an un qualified person, but there is an exception in favour of a solicitor in the employment of a " public Company." This term is nowhere defined, either in the Act or in the Companies Act. The offence too, is enabling an unqualified person to practise as a solicitor. Sec. 38 prohibits the sharing of fees with an un qualified person. There is an exception here of fees received by a public officer in respect of work done in the course of his duty; but what is a " public officer " ; and does a prohibition of sharing fees extend to passing over the whole fee ? Again