The Gazette 1964/67

Cathal O Floinn, President of the District Court, in Buswells' Hotel, Molesworth Street, on Thurs day, 28th April.

1st April 1966 Mr. Patrick J. Hennigan, Solicitor, Ballina, Co. Mayo, has been suspended until further Order and his bank accounts frozen. LAND REGISTRY DELAYS The following question was asked by Mr. Gerard Sweetman in the Bail: "To ask the Minister for Justice when he expects the necessary buildings and staff to be made available to the Land Registry so that dealings can be completed within a reasonable time of lodg ment." The Minister for Justice replied as follows: "As indicated in reply to a question on 1st December last, delays in the Land Registry are mainly due to the inability to recruit and retain the necessary technical and clerical staff. "The over-all position continues to be difficult. A recent competition for posts as legal assistant failed to attract a sufficient number of qualified candidates, and I am at present considering what can be done to secure adequate legal staff. "I expect that a sufficient number of clerical officers will be assigned to the Land Registry within the next month or so. Because of complications arising from a review of salary scales, it is unlikely that vacancies for draughtsmen will be filled for some months. "All possible steps, including the working of overtime by legal, clerical and technical staffs, are being taken to reduce delays to a minimum. "While the existing accommodation is not re garded as ideal for present requirements, it does not contribute in any significant degree to delays in the discharge of current business of the Land Registry. Arrangements to erect a two-storey exten sion over the Public Record Office building to provide additional accommodation for the Land Registry have been brought to an advanced stage and I am informed that the Office of Public Works hope to place the contract within the next month or two." SOCIETY OF YOUNG SOLICITORS An ordinary meeting of the Society of Young Solicitors took place on the 31st March 1966 in Buswells' Hotel, when Mr. Patrick Kilroy repeated his very absorbing lecture on Companies and Finance Legislation. There was a large attendance present and a very lively and penetrating discus sion followed the lecture. A lecture was given by District Justice

THE LAND ACT AND THE LAND REGISTRY

The attention of members is drawn to the omis sion of appropriate certificates in the following applications by solicitors which compel the legal staff of the Land Registry to issue Requisitions which would otherwise be unnecessary. The cases are as follows Responsibility Attaching to Undertaking (a) Transmissions both on testacy and intestacy. (b) Transfers which include charges. In this in stance a certificate will be included in respect of the transferee but invariably no certificate in relation to the chargee is included. (c) Settlements: where settlements create life estates, e.g. in favour of the settlor and/or his wife. Certificates in relation to such estates are very often omitted. CASES OF THE MONTH An action was taken by the National Union Bank of Cavendish Square, London, to commit Mr. Ellis Lincoln, a solicitor of the Supreme Court of Judicature and sole partner in the firm of Messrs Lincoln & Lincoln of Knight's House, Hatton Wall, E.C.I., to prison for the alleged breach of certain undertakings given to the Bank, or for leave to issue a writ of attachment. Counsel for the Bank in addressing the Court stated (inter alia): "the jurisdiction of the Court is not limited to a solicitor's undertaking to hold money. The purpose of the jurisdiction is to en force honourable conduct on the part of officers of the Court. It was not limited merely to ordering the fulfilment of the undertakings, but was un limited. He submitted that one method of en forcing an undertaking by a solicitor, although not given to the Court but to a third party, was to make an order in a contempt of Court proceed ings. The proper procedure was the issue of a writ of attachment, or a motion to commit. The Court could enforce its disciplinary powers by either proceedings. The fact that it was a manag ing clerk and not the solicitor who had given the undertaking was irrelevant." (In re Ellis Lincoln, a solicitor, Times newspaper, England, 9th March 1966). 105