The Gazette 1964/67

beginning on the ............ day of ...... ...19...... and ending on the ......... day of ......... 19...... and that I am/we are are satisfied, subject to the matters set out on the back hereof from such examination and from the information and ex planations given to me/us that during the said accounting period you/your firm have complied with the provisions of the Solicitors' Accounts Regulations now in operation, and further that the sum or the total of the sums at credit of the designated client account or accounts and desig nated trust bank account or accounts as defined in the said regulations kept by you/your firm, was not less than the total of the sums required to be so kept in conformity with the provisions of the said regulations. Dated this ......... day of ......... 19...... Signature ................................................ Professional Qualification ........................... Address ................................................... Notes (a) State full name of the solicitor or firm of solicitors in respect of whom the certificate is issued. (b) When the solicitor has two or more places of business he may at his option lodge a separate certificate for each office or one certificate to cover all. All addresses should be stated in the certificate, if only one certificate is issued. Dated this 28th day of July 1966. Signed on behalf of the Incorporated Law Society of Ireland. ROBERT McD. TAYLOR President I concur in the making of the above regulations. CAHIR DAVITT President of the High Court Explanatory Note (This note is not part of the instrument and does not purport to be a legal interpretation thereof) The regulations oblige each practising solicitor to lodge an accountant's certificate each year with the Incorporated Law Society of Ireland and define the minimum books of account to be kept by solicitors. ABSOLUTE LIABILITY IN ROAD

ative law in Dublin for his doctorate of law. He specialises in the law of road traffic and negligence. The German system is based on the law of strict liability, i.e. the owner of a mechanically propelled vehicle is strictly liable for damage to third parties while it is in normal use. The defi nition of normal use of a mechanically propelled vehicle is a question of law on which there has been litigation in the German courts. A car which is permanently parked is not in normal use for the purpose of strict liability of the owner. On the other hand if the car is stopped or moving slowly in traffic it is in normal use so that third parties injured by collision by the vehicle can claim against the owner on the basis of strict liability. The principle is that the presence of a motor vehicle on the highway while in normal use creates a risk to the public for which the owner is responsible in damages. A person injured as the result of a collision with a mechanically propelled vehicle in normal use has a right of action in the courts against the owner. The principle of strict liability applies only to the extent of damage suffered up to a limit of 50,000 DM (about £4,000). The right to damages in an amount exceeding £4,000 depends upon proof of negli gence by the plaintiff on the part of the defendant. In calculating the damages for the purpose of strict liability it is understood that compensation for pain and suffering will not be taken into account. Damages for the purpose of strict lia bility will be composed of medical and other expenses, loss of earnings actual and potential and other financial loss capable of ascertainment. There is compulsory insurance against third party liability under German law. Insurance is effected through private enterprise companies, not through the State. Therefore the majority of claims are defended by insurance companies. The injured party will negotiate through his lawyer with the insurance company or their lawyer and failing agreement may resort to the courts. As their is strict liability in law on the part of the owner of the vehicle all that the plaintiff or claimaint need prove is that he was injured as the result of an accident or collision with the owner's mechanically propelled vehicle while it was in normal use. This will usually be admitted. The only question then arising is the quantum of damage. Here there is an important principle. The conduct of the parties is taken into account in assessing the amount of damage. On a principle similar to our apportionment of blame under the Civil Liability Act 1961 if the defendant can show that the conduct of the plaintiff was largely res ponsible for the accident blame will be appor-

ACCIDENT CASES The German Position

The following information was received from a German referendar at present studying compar- 45