The Gazette 1967/71

the purchaser's solicitor should advise the client not to buy where no such warranty or indemnity is available. If the client decides to proceed with the transaction after advice to the contrary it is his own responsibility. It is pointed out that the Society's standard conditions by public auction and private contract leave scope for amendments and additional matter in the schedules and in negotiation between the parties and their solicitors. Sale by way of transfer of shares Members who are engaged in purchasing a company by way of transfer of shares, the prin cipal asset being leasehold property valued at about two thirds of the total assets, ask for guidance as to the appropriate method of charging their costs. The committee referred to Opinion C 26 of the Council which stated that in such a case the solicitor would be entitled to charge the com mission scale fee on the value of the freehold or leasehold property provided that, 1. Title is deduced and investigated pursuant to a contract for sale. 2. There is a price on which the commission scale fee can be calculated. 3. There is an assurance of the property, the subject of the contract duly completed and registered. The report of the committee on the present case stated that where the work envisaged by the scale fee is substantially done even though no assurance of the property is necessary then the appropriate scale fee might be taken as a guide, although not as a rule, in assessing the Schedule 2 charge. In reading this digest regard should be had to differences between Irish and English statute law. Administration A former clerk of a council whose employment ceased when areas were altered by government order succeeded in his claim that an industrial tribunal was wrong in law when deciding that they could net consider afresh his claim for resettlement and long-term compensation. The .compensation had been assessed by the council on the basis of emoluments he had expected to receive, but, as a partner in a firm of solicitors, he had received much less. Myrddin-Baker v. Teeside Corporation. Q.B.D. 28/1/70. [Judgment delivered January 26] 100 CURRENT LAW DIGEST SELECTED

Professional Negligence Indemnity Insurance There was a general discussion on the subject of two schemes received by the Society. The matter was referred to a special committee for considera tion and early report back to the Council. Change of solicitor — costs A client who owed his solicitor a substantial sum for costs transferred his retainer to another office with instructions to sell his business premises and to discharge his liabilities out of the proceeds. The only secured creditor was a bank and the proceeds of the sale would barely cover the amount due to the bank. The bank would not permit the second solicitors to pay the costs due to the solicitors originally acting and the last mentioned solicitors suggested that the second solicitors should not act further unless they had authority to pay the costs. A committee of the Council which considered the matter in their report referred to opinion DR 22 of the Council which states that there is no general or universal rule whereby a solicitor should not act for a client in business where the client is being represented by another solicitor unless provision is being made by the client for payment of the other solicitor's costs. In the circumstances the Council did not issue any direction in the matter being of the opinion that each case must depend upon its own facts and that it would be inappropriate to issue any direction without a complete investigation inclu ding the client's reason for wishing to change his solicitor. Society's standard conditions of sale A member wrote to the Society stating that as they understood the position it turned out after the exchange of the contracts that roads and other services were not in charge and that a suitable indemnity is not available the purchaser can do nothing about it, this not being the question of title. The member suggested that Counsel for the Society should be asked to advise on this matter in connection with the standard conditions of sale. The matter was referred to Counsel who replied that it would be an intolerable burden for the vendors to take on as a matter of course a war ranty that roads had been taken over when in most cases of building estates they have not been and he suggested that the simple answer is that