The Gazette 1989

GAZETTE

APRIL 1989

CORRESPONDENCE

but by a group of companies so that it is very difficult to know which of the companies owns the goods which are on the premises which the companies occupy. In this report the Law Reform Commission sets out to deal with the problems presented by these changes in our habits and com- mercial practices. The recommendations centre around the giving of greater protection for the Sheriff when he seizes goods and the limiting of the time during which a third party can claim against goods which have been seized. It suggests also a right for the Sheriff to endorse and negotiate instruments and to surrender and collect the proceeds of life policies, which have been taken in execution. It is recommended that Sheriffs be protected where they seize in good faith property in the joint or sole possession of the judgement debtor but that if he seizes goods in the possession of a third party he does so at his own risk. This is alright as far as it goes but would need to be expanded to cover the position where goods are seized at a premises from which several companies, which are associated, all carry on business. This is a very common situation and it is almost impossible to know who owns the goods. The much vexed question of goods held subject to "retention of title" has been left over for a later report. Useful recommendations are made to simplify the procedures relating to the obtaining of execution orders and that they also should all have the same legal life. Interpleader procedure is also to be simplified and it will be possible to interplead in the original pro- ceedings without commencing a new action. Sheriffs will welcome the recommendation that their fees be increased and index-linked. Fees for lodgement of execution orders for example were fixed in 1926, the usual fee being around 35p, which in todays money would be around £10.00. It is recommended that the Sheriff should report to the Plaintiff and the Court in every case within a specified time. One wonders what the Court would do with the

large flow of reports that would arrive. The Commission appear to be under the impression that reporting to the Court would in some way hurry up the execution of orders. The reality is that, as the law stands at the moment, orders are delayed because of the extreme difficulty in making seizures, which forces Sheriffs to tread warily and collect as much money as possible by instalments. If the making of seizures were less hazardous there would be less delays and plaintiffs and solicitors would have greater confidence in the system. This short report - 58 pages - deals very clearly and concisely with both the law and practice relating to Sheriffs with appropriate references to authorities through- out. It is in its own right an excellent work of reference. • Michael Hayes DEPT. OF JUSTICE A FAX machine has been installed in The Administration Manager's Office in Arás Uí Dhalaigh. The facilities are available to all Court Staff in the Four Courts complex. The Fax No. is (01) 7 2 1 6 20 A DICTIONARY OF IRISH LAW By Henry Murdoch BL "This dictionary provides an excellent tool in hands of lawyers both experienced and those less experienced as well" ... The Hon. Thomas A. Finlay, Chief Justice, writing in the forward. Now Available Post Free Price IRC25 Paperback - IR£38 Hardback Direct from the publishers: TOPAZ PUBLICATIONS 6 4, Upper Georges Street, Dun Leogheire, Co. Dublin ... or from leading booksellers

The Editor, Law Society Gazette, Blackhall Place, Dublin 2. 14th February, 1989. Re: Shopping Centre Leeses Dear Sir, While the relevant law may be the same for Shopping Centres, High Street Shops and Office Blocks, Shopping Centres involve, as your Members will readily appreciate, a melange of inter- relationships which require care- ful consideration by potential tenants. The National Federation of Shopping Centres was established to study the problems and make recommendations and representa- tions as appropriate. It is recognised that many of the problems are of a commercial nature and not of a legal nature. A typical example of this is the 'device' whereby a landlord will admit a new tenant at a high rent but free of premium in advance of the general rent review date for the Centre, in order to establish a higher market rental value. Service charges provide another example as there is a trusteeship situation here with landlords effectively spending the money of tenants without in many instances giving the tenants any say in how the money is spent. This is particularly worrying in relation to the advertising of Shopping Centres which benefits landlords indirectly and has benefits for the tenants which are difficult to measure. The Federation does not deal directly with individual Shopping Centre tenants but, recognising that 'the damage is done' when the lease is signed, has agreed to assist potential lessees referred by practising Solicitors. The telephone number of the Federation is (01) 611911. Yours faithfully, GEORGE EATON, FCA, Secretary General, National Federation of Shopping Centres, 2 Fitzwilliam Place, Dublin 2.

108