The Gazette 1967/71

matter today, and the consequential publication, may help to make it known. 4th February, 1971.

Mr. Crowley asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he will set up a commission to scrutinise false claims in advertising; and when such a claim now raises, how it is dealt with. Mr. Lalor: With your permission, a Cheann Com- hairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 38 and 39 together. The geneal questions of false claims in adver tising or otherwise, warranties, and civil remedies for consumers are under consideration as part of my Department's programme of consumer pro tection. The first measure in this programme, the Merchandise Marks Act, 1970, was enacted last July, and further legislation is being prepared. Mr. Crowley: Can the Minister explain the delay in introducing this very important legis lation? In 1966 the Minister's predecessor said he was about to instigate an investigation into the whole question of consumer protection. Mr. Lalor: As the Deputy said, I hope this will be a very important piece of legislation, and that may be the reason why I am not inclined to rush into making decision in the preparation of the legislation, without having taken a complete look round to ensure that this consumer protection legislation will be as comprehensive as possible. Mr. Cooney: Pending the introduction of this legislation, will the Minister make it known to the public that their rights at common law under statute are already superior to the rights offered by manufacturers? They should not enter into any manufacturers's guarantee which excludes their common law statutory rights. Mr. Lalor: The Deputy's question indicates how comprehensive consumer protection is, the case he has mentioned is only one facet of it. Mr. Cooney: I know it is only one facet of it but I am asking that we make the public aware of that facet of it. Mr. Lalor: This will be covered. It is some thing which is available at the present time. Mr. Cooney: But the public is not aware of it. Mr. Colley: An effort was made to make the public aware of it some time ago. Mr. Lalor: My problem is to have the enabling legislation there. I find it difficult to appreciate that I must continuously be operating on the basis of making the public aware of all the things to which they are entitled. The Deputy's raising the

STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS The Rules of the Superior Courts (No. 1.) 1970 (S.I. No. 37 of 1971) amend the existing practice in certain respects. Rule 1 deletes Rule 4 of Order 22 of the Rules of the Superior Courts 1962 as amended by the Rules of the Superior Courts (No. 1) 1964 and replaces it by a new Rule 4 which permits plaintiff to accept a sum paid into court within fourteen days (as at present) or within such further period as may be agreed upon by the parties. The new rule also allows the plaintiff to tax his costs incurred to the date of giving notice to the defendant of acceptance of the sum. Rule 2 deletes Rule 8 Order 41 of the 1962 Rules and replaces it by a new Rule 8 which exempts orders for delivery of possession from the penal endorse ment. Rule 3 lays down the procedure relating to appeals to the Supreme Court from decisions of the Circuit Court under the Electoral Act 1963. The Rules of the Superior Courts (No. 2) 1970 (S.I. No. 38 of 1971) delete Rule 37 (8) of Order 99 and Part III Appendix W of the Rules of the Superior Courts 1962 which relate to the allow ance of fees and expenses of witnesses on party and party taxation and replace them by a new rule 37 (8). Appendix W. Part III which provides a scale of expenses for witnesses is deleted. The new rule provides that such reasonable charges and expenses as appear to have been properly in curred in procuring evidence and the attendance of witnesses are to be allowed. The Taxing Master has given a fairly wide discretion to assess tra velling expenses including the actual cost of trans port by hired car and when witnesses travel in groups. The reasonable expenses and allowances of witnesses attending consultations and confer ences properly held prior to the trial are to be chargeable on taxation as between party and party. The Circuit Court Rules, 1971 (S.I. No. 41 of 1971). These Rules, which come into operation 222