The Gazette 1994

GAZETTE

M W H APRIL 1994

P R E S

I D E N

T ' S

M E S S A G E

Sol ici tors (Amendmen t) Bi l l, 1 9 94

provided for in these sections would be subject to the right of appeal to the High Court and would be without prejudice to the existing rights of clients to issue proceedings for alleged negligence or to seek taxation of their costs. 'Transparency' is a word of the 1990s. In the context of the Bill, it means providing for regulatory procedures in which both the public and the profession as a whole have confidence. Section 7 of the Bill will enable the Society to appoint to committees of the Council both lay persons and solicitors who are not members of the Council. Also, section 16 of the Bill will enable the President of the High Court to appoint up to five lay members to the Disciplinary Tribunal (the former Disciplinary Committee) in addition to up to ten practising solicitors, so that one lay member will sit as part of the quorum of three in each division of that Tribunal. In advance of these statutory provisions the Society last year appointed two lay 'observers' ( Frank Bracken and Lenore Mrkwicka) to the Registrar's Committee, each of whom will become full members when the Bill is passed. The Society's Solicitors Bill Committee are now engaged in a detailed examination of the provisions of the Bill. I would invite you to read the full text of the Bill and to submit as soon as possible to the Society any comments you wish to make. The Second Stage of the Bill is likely to commence in the Dail towards the end of March, with the Committee Stage then being taken by the new permanent Dail Committee on Legislation. The Bill is likely to pass all stages of both Houses of the Oireachtas before the end of this year.

The Solicitors (Amendment) Bill, 1994 was presented to Dail Eireann by the Minister for Justice on 8 February 1994. It is substantially similar to the 1991 Bill, which lapsed on the dissolution of the Dail in November 1992. The Bill contains a number of substantial amendments to the Solicitors Act, 1954 and to the Solicitors (Amendment) Act, 1960, as well as some entirely new provisions. You will have received my circular letter of 10 February 1994 which highlighted the substantive changes to the 1991 text and the provisions to which the Society had objected, as follows: provisions of a £250,000 'cap' on claims; (b) education - the extending of the enabling provisions in relation to the professional education/ training of apprentices, solicitors and other persons; (c) apprenticeship - the reduction of the maximum period to two years; (d) charges to clients - the prohibition of the charging of fees 1. New Provisions in 1994 Bill: (a) Compensation Fund - the

Michael V. O'Mahony, President, Law Society

that the Society would have to fund the Independent Adjudicator - the "Ombudsman" who would investigate complaints concerning the way in which the Society had

handled complaints about solicitors from members of the public.

The 1994 Bill as now presented contains 83 sections - the majority of which extend or elaborate on the regulatory powers of the Society. The extended regulatory provisions should be generally acceptable to the profession, as the need for their application would only arise in the relatively small number of cases where the conduct of a solicitor in one way or another fell below the high professional standards which clients are entitled to expect and to which the vast majority of solicitors readily conform. The regulatory jurisdiction of the Society will be extended by sections 8 and 9 of the Bill to the investigation of complaints against solicitors of inadequate services (i.e. legal services "not of the quality that could be reasonably be expected of . . . a solicitor") and of the charging of excessive fees. Any decision of the Society to apply the sanctions

measured as a percentage or proportion of the damages recovered, except in debt collection.

2. Provisions objected to by Society:

(a) conveyancing/probate services by banks, etc. - these provisions are now likely to be dropped from the Bill by the Minister at Committee Stage; (b) fee advertising - the Society would not be entitled to "prohibit the advertising of any charge or fee by a solicitor for the provision of any specified legal service"; (c) the imposition of a requirement

Michael V. O'Mahony President

47