The Gazette 1983

INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY OF IRELAND GAZETTE

April 1983

Vol. 77. No. 3

Comment . .. . . . the Cost of Motor Insurance T HE recent report of the Enquiry into the cost and methods of providing Motor Insurance 1982* is to be welcomed. One should always welcome such reports particularly those that show a high level of competence and expertise in their preparation and presentation. Solicitors will be particularly interested in the observa- tions and recommendations on legal delays, legal costs andjury assessments. Legal delays are most notable in the Dublin High Court jury list, w*here the delays from setting down to actual listing for hearing are now at least two years. On the reason for the delays, the Report quotes the Bar Council submissions — "the insufficient number of Judges available to hear cases in the High Court, the insufficient number of courthouses available for hearing jury trials in the High Court and the inadequacy of facilities available in the existing courthouses and the inadequacy of staff to service the courts generally." The Court emphasises the severe personal hardship to plaintiff litigants by such delays and at the same time the complaint of insurance companies that such delays ultimately result in far higher Court awards than would have been made two years before. On the vexed and difficult question of jury assessments they account for about 16% of the total cost of settling claims. The imposition of 23% V.A.T. on solicitors' and barristers' fees will certainly not reduce that percentage. The principal factor affecting the size of such legal costs is the number of cases where legal proceedings are commenced and go all the way to the door of the court. Two diverse points of view are reflected in the Report for this phenomenon — the one that it is because insurance companies do not reasonably and realistically attempt to settle cases early, the other that plaintiffs seek to extend the maximum possible amount of compensation, whether justified or not. On the vexed and difficult question of jury assessment of damages the Report recommends no change in the system of jury trial other than that in a High Court hearing for damages for injuries, the trial judge should be permitted to inform the jury as to what he estimates to be the going rate of general damages for the sort of injuries proved in the circumstances of the particular case. This is a common sense suggestion, far better than cliches in judges' charges such as that the jury "must be fair and reasonable and just to both parties". Would such a change still, however, result in uncertainty and inconsistency in that the "going rate" of general damages for a "plaintiffs" judge might (Continued on P. 68) 55

In this issue. .. Comment

^

People v. Pringle, McCann & O'Shea

57

Company/Commercial Referral Servite

61

61

^

High Court — Jury Lists

^

Witnessing and Attestation

European Court of Justice

^

6 7

Self Regulating for Advertising

Exempted Development

^

69

Book Reviews

Probate: Proceeds of Life Assurance Policies

73

73

For Your Diary AGM o f T he Solicitors'Benevolent Association

75

75

A.I.J.A

77

Correspondence

78

Professional Information

Executive Editor: Mary Buckley Editorial Board: Charles R. M. Meredith, Chairman John F. Buckley Gary Byrne William Earley Michael V. O'Mahony Maxwell Sweeney Advertising: Liam Ó hOisin, Telephone 305236 The views expressed in this publication, save where other-wise indicated, are the views of the contributors and not necessarily the views of the Council of the Society. The appearance of an advertisement in this publication does not necessarily indicate approval by the Society tor the product or service advertised. Published at Blackhall Place, Dublin 7.