The Gazette 1993

GAZETTE

NOVEMBER 1993

M

I

W

H

Compens a t i on Fund - Payments The following claim amounts were admitted by the Compensation Fund Committee and approved for payment by the Council of the Law Society at

Viewpoint (Contd.) is to administer justice in the

individual cases that come before them. While the judiciary, of course, have to involve themselves in administering the lists and ensuring that judges are available to deal with the work as it arises, it is the responsibility of the Minister to ensure that, in overall terms, the courts are working efficiently and that the public are getting a proper service and that the service represents good value for the taxpayers' money. That is not a judicial function and those carrying it out would not, in our view, be encroaching in any way on the proper role and responsibilities of the judges. What the Law Society and the Bar Council are seeking is that, first of all, the courts are established as a proper service; second, that there is somebody in overall charge with responsibility for promoting efficiency, examining the cost- effectiveness of different expenditure programmes, suggesting ways of delivering the service better and ensuring value for money. The establishment of the courts as an Executive Agency need not necessarily take it outside the mainstream of the Civil Service. The Executive Agency concept is simply a mechanism for freeing up day-to-day decision-making from central bureaucratic control - in other words, delegating authority to a senior official at court level. It is axiomatic that that person would have to work closely with the judges; that he would have to consult widely before taking action to address difficulties and that he would have to be a person who would be sensitive to the respective roles of administrators and judges and stay scrupulously within his own domain. The case has been made and requires urgent consideration. There is an onus on those who have a different point of view to set out clearly why they see it differently. •

IR£ 50.00

October John J O'Reilly, 1 Farnham Street, Cavan, Co. Cavan. Conor Kileen & Elio Malocco, Chatham House, Chatham Street, Dublin 2. Forde, 52 O'Connell Street, Ennis, Co. Clare. Christopher James C Glynn, Dublin Road, Tuam, Co. Galway. Michael Dunne, 63/65 Main Street, Blackrock, Co. Dublin. John Kieran Brennan, Mayfield, Enniscorthy, Co. Wexford.

its meetings in September and October, 1993. The name of the solicitor in respect of whose defalcation the claim arose is listed in the left hand column.

26,956.00

IR£

September

38,112.33

Christopher Forde, 52 O'Connell Street, Ennis, Co. Clare. John J O'Reilly, 1 Farnham Street, Cavan, Co. Cavan.

5,963.64

130,462.26

580.00

41,500.00

5,619.75

John Kieran Brennan, Mayfield,

Enniscorthy, Co. Wexford.

900.00

14,766.70

James C. Glynn, Dublin Road, Tuam, Co. Galway. Michael Dunne, 63/65 Main Street, Blackrock, Co. Dublin. Conor Killeen & Elio Malocco, Chatham House, Chatham Street, Dublin 2. Anthony J O'Malley, James Street, Westport, Co. Mayo. Jonathan PT Brooks, 17/18 Nassau Street, Dublin 2.

2,187.92

Diarmuid

Corrigan,

6 St. Agnes Road, Crumlin, Dublin 12.

2,990.75

240,168.51 •

9,736.57

Established scientists, experienced in all areas of

forensic document

examination

4,987.80

Quick response

Competitive rates Contact: Mike HaU DOCUMENT EVIDENCE Gatsby Court 172 Holliday St. Birmingham B1 11]

267,575.30

Tel: 0044 21 643 0990 Fax: 0044 21 633 0288

See summary of the joint Law Society/ Bar Council Submission on page 337.

312,220.51

330