Briefing
Report of Law Society Council meeting held on 11 July 2003 Judge Angela Condon On behalf of the Council, the president extended congratulations to Angela Condon, Council member, who had recently been appointed to the District Court bench and who, consequently, was resigning from the Council. Pursuant to the bye-laws, the Council approved the co-option of John Dillon-Leetch to the Council for the balance of the term for which Ms Condon had been elected. Council elections 2003 Pursuant to the bye-laws, the Council set Monday 22 September as the final date for receipt of nominations for the Council elections 2003 and Thursday 30 October as the close of poll date. Motion: referral scheme for counselling and guidance The following motion was notified for debate at the meeting on 5 September 2003: ‘That this Council approves the establishment of a referral scheme to provide counselling and guidance for solicitors at risk from occupational stress or similar health problems’. Proposed: Gerard F Griffin Seconded: John O’Connor Implementation of the Second money-laundering directive The Council had a lengthy discussion regarding the regulations signed on 10 June 2003 by the minister for justice, equality and law reform designating solicitors for the purposes of the Second money-laundering directive, with effect from 15 September 2003. Concerns were expressed regarding several aspects of the
draft regulations, particularly in relation to discretions contained in the directive that had not been transposed into the regulations. It was agreed that these matters should be raised with the minister as a matter of urgency. Personal Injuries Assessment Board The Council considered the heads of the Personal Injuries Assessment Board Bill, 2003, and the heads of the Civil Liability and Courts Bill, 2003, published by the government recently. Ward McEllin reported that the society had identified serious flaws in both proposals and intended to engage in a comprehensive series of meetings with public representatives in the weeks leading up to and during the consideration of the legislation by the Oireachtas. Stuart Gilhooly noted that the society’s task force also intended to make a comprehensive submission in relation to the Civil Liability and Courts Bill. The director general reported on a meeting with the cabinet sub-committee on the reduction of insurance costs, at which it had been stated that the PIAB would operate as an inquisitorial system and there would be no need for lawyers or other advisors for claimants. This was a move away from the previous recommendation that claimants should be entitled to representation and no good reasons had been given for this fundamental change. It appeared that the prevailing mood was to regard the person who caused the accident as the victim and this mood was becoming more manifestly expressed. He noted also that, on the
following Wednesday, the Law Society had been invited to attend before the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Enterprise and Small Business. Donald Binchy noted that even the long title to the PIAB Bill was begrudging in its terms, by referring to ‘claimants’ involvement in allegedly negligent accidents’. Eamon O’Brien said that if any changes were being introduced to the current system, the society should seek assurances that there would be a corresponding reduction in premiums. He noted that, even with the high level of fatal accidents in Ireland, an EU directive designed to protect passengers in motor vehicles had still not been implemented by the state and he urged that the society should call on the state to meet its international and European obligations to reduce the number of accidents. Competition Authority study of the professions The Council discussed an exchange of correspondence between the director general and Alan Gray, chief executive of Indecon, relating to the claim made by Mr Gray at the launch of the Indecon report for the Competition Authority that the level of cost savings to consumers of professional services if the Indecon recommendations were introduced in Ireland would be approximately 30%. The basis for this claim had been examined for the society by Europe Economics, who had concluded that ‘nothing in Indecon’s letter would justify a conclusion of this sort; nor does any of the other material of which we are aware relating to this
Law Society Gazette Aug/Sept 2003
investigation suggest an effect of such an order of magnitude’. Solicitors’ undertakings to the VHI James McCourt reported on a meeting with the VHI, at which there had been a very frank exchange of views but no progress on the matter of undertakings, despite several efforts by the society to resolve matters and find some common ground. The society had suggested a variety of alternatives to the VHI, none of which were acceptable to it. He did not see any point in further round-table discussions with the VHI, given its current intractable views. Ward McEllin noted that, at the meeting with the cabinet sub-committee on reduction of insurance costs, the tánaiste had reacted very strongly on hearing that the VHI was urging injured members to issue proceedings for compensation. Reciprocity with California State Bar The Council approved a reciprocal arrangement with the State Bar of California which would make California-qualified attorneys eligible for admission to the roll of solicitors in Ireland on foot of passing the qualified lawyer’s transfer test, with matching requirements for Irish solicitors seeking admission in California. Human Rights Commissions The Council approved a submission to the Joint Committee of the Irish and Northern Irish Human Rights Commissions on a charter of rights. G
41