The Gazette 1955-58

(a) of the Commissioners' costs, (V) of the tenants' costs in each case, (c) of the combined costs if members act for all parties to the transaction. The Council referred to the resolution passed at the ordinary general meeting of the Society in June, 1955, authorising a reduced scale of costs in such cases. On a request for guidance from the members concerned the Council stated that if the tenant- purchaser asks the solicitor for the Commissioners to act for him he should pay fees appropriate to vendor and purchaser on the reduced scale provided that all the work required is substantially performed by the solicitor for both parties. If separate solicitors are employed each will pay his own solicitor on the reduced scale. Client's privilege. MEMBER acted for both parties on a sale of land and prepared the contract. The vendor subsequently sought to rescind and members received instructions from the purchaser to institute proceedings for specific performance. Counsel has advised that member's evidence will be necessary in the proceedings. Member asked the Council for guidance as to whether (a) having acted jointly for the parties on the contemplated sale of the purchase he may now act for either of them in the circumstances which have arisen, (b) on the question of privilege as to giving evidence. On the facts stated the Council were of the opinion that as member has acted jointly for the parties on the contemplated sale and purchase he should not now act for either of them in the circumstances and that he must plead privilege if summoned to give evidence and abide by the ruling of the court. Legal Appointment. Canvassing. THE Council expressed the opinion that it would be contrary to the Professional Practice Regulations for a solicitor to seek votes for a taxed costs position as solicitor to a local authority or similar body or otherwise solicit professional business. The Council were also of the opinion that it would be unprofes sional to seek votes for a whole time salaried appointment unless the terms of the competition so permit and the Society had approved of the conditions of appointment. NOVEMBER ZZND : The President in the Chair. Also present Messrs. George A. Nolan, Derrick M. Martin, John R. Halpin, Francis J. Lanigan, J. R. Quirke, A. Cox, D. J. Mayne, D. J. Collins, R. F. O'Reilly, Charles Downing, Niall Gaffney, John Carrigan, George G. Overend, F. X. Burke, W. J. Comerford, Cornelius J. Daly, John J. Dundon,

John J. Nash, Thomas A. O'Reilly, JohnB. Jermyn, Joseph P. Tyrrell, Scan O'hUadhaigh, Peter E. O'Connell, C. E. Callan, R. Mc.D. Taylor, Reginald J. Nolan, Patrick F. O'Reilly, Terence de Vere White, P. R. Boyd, Louis Walsh, Ralph J. Walker. The following was among the business transacted: Lease at a rack rent. A LEASE of a mill with other works and land was granted for a term of 500 years from ist January, 1956 at the yearly rent of £3,500 per annum for the first five years and £4,500 per annum for the second five years and £5,600 per annum thereafter, lessees paying rates and taxes. The area of the land is 6 acres 39 perches and the rateable valuation: buildings £220, lands £3 IDS. There are no unusual covenants and conditions but the lease contains an option to the lessees to purchase for £90,000 plus any sums expended on the property by the lessors or mortgagees. The fee simple value was estimated by the lessors at £90,000 to £100,000 and by the lessees at £71,000 and the lessees' valuers estimated the fair letting value at £5,700 per annum tenant paying rates and executing repairs. The lessors submitted that if the term of the lease were short the rent would be higher to off-set possible losses due to vacancy. The parties asked for the ruling of the Council as to the proper scale of the lessors' charges. The Council decided that the rent is a rack rent and that the costs should be charged on the lower scale. Negotiation fee. IN reply to questions from members, the Council expressed the following opinion : (i) If a solicitor prepares a contract for sale, the vendor and purchaser having already agreed on the amount of the purchase money, is the contract negotiated with the aid of the solicitor, (a) the same solicitor acting for both parties; (&) different solicitors acting for the parties ? Opinion : (i) (a) If the solicitor draws the contract on behalf of the vendor the contract is negotiated on the vendor's behalf with the aid of the solicitor but the negotiation fee should not be charged against the purchaser ; (&) in this case where the parties are separately represented each party negotiates with the aid of a solicitor as regards the terms of the contract even although the price has been agreed. (2) If a solicitor acting for an intending purchaser who has already agreed with the vendor on the amount of the purchase money peruses and approves of (without making any alterations) a contract prepared by the vendor's solicitor and gets the contract signed by the purchaser, is that a contract 53