The Gazette 1978

JULY-AUGUST 1978

GAZETTE

Correspondence 6 Farnham Street, Cavan 16th June 1978 Re: Decisions of Interest; Extending time for late Notice of Appeal from District Court Decision Dear Sir, Cavan County Council made a loan to the Defendant under Section 39 of the Housing Act 1966 secured by way of Deed of Charge which included covenants for repayment by regular quarterly instalments. In consequence of alleged non-payment of the instalments, the Council brought a summons under the Housing Act 1966 for possession. On the 9th March 1978, the District Justice, at Cavan District Court, granted to the Council a warrant for possession. Time for appeal expired on 23rd March 1978. On the 21st April 1978, the Defendant's Solicitors served Notice of Application to the District Court to extend time for the late filing of an appeal. This came before the District Justice on the 27th April 1978. The District Justice expressed the view that on the making of his Order in the District Court his jurisdiction in the matter was spent and he did not consider that Rule 13 of the District Court Rules 1948 (as substituted by Rule Number 5 of the District Court Rules 1955) gave him jurisdiction to extend time for late filing of appeal. In concluding that he had no jurisdiction to extend time for appeal, he also took into consideration the decision in the State (O'Sullivan v District Justice Buckley & Another) S.C. 101 I.L.T.R. Page 152 and the Obiter of Judge Lavery therein; "In condisering this appeal it has occurred to me that it may be that an application to extend time for appeal to the Circuit Court should be made not in the District Court but to the Appellate Tribunal — that is the Circuit Court". The Defendant appealed to the Circuit Court against the District Justice's Order dated 27th April 1978, refusing to extend time for appeal. The matter came before the Circuit Court Judge at Bailieborough County Cavan on 16th inst. He did not consider himself bound by the Obiter of the Supreme Court decision above referred to and essentially on the basis that the Circuit Court Rules did not provide for an application in the Circuit Court to extend time for a District Court appeal and on the basis that a Defendant should have such a right of appeal he made a specific finding that Rule 13 of the District Court Rules above referred to does confer on the District Justice jurisdiction to extend time for filing of late notice of appeal from a District Court's decision. The question of whether in fact he will extend time in the case in issue has been adjourned for evidence on the merits. Yours faithfully, George V. Maloney i!r * 4 Portumna, Co. Galway 3rd August, 1978 Re: Society's Summer Meeting, Killarney Dear Sir,

saying "the sum of one million pounds appears to include sums representing overheads of the Society and suggested that it should be replaced by a smaller fee". I made no such statement. I referred to the accounts of the Compensation fund and I pointed out that members subscriptions to the Compensation fund amounted to £50,000 but that a sum of £25,000 had been paid to the Society's overheads and I expressed surprise at such a sum being contributed from the Compensation fund to the Society's overheads. I am quite satisfied with the explanation given by the President when he explained that £25,000 represented the'expense the Society incurred in dealing with the compensation fund and helping to reduce claims being made on same but I am still rather surprised that this should come to a figure of almost £500 a week. As the statement attributed to me in your report is rather meaningless I would be glad if you would publish this letter. Yours faithfully, Dominick H. Kearns

NAT I ONWI DE INVESTIGATIONS (Laurence Beggs)

126 BROADFORD RISE BALLINTEER DUBLIN 16 Phone 989964

Valuation for compensation is our business

Oi bo r a. King A fttogron)

Duolln 760251 Cork 21371 Galway 65261

In your report of the General Meeting of the Society held at Killarney in the last issue of the Gazette I am quoted as 126