Committee Reports > List of Committees > Seanad > 1963 > Select Committee on Statutory Instruments (Appointed 21st March, 1962) > Report No. 01 (1963) - Statutory Instruments [11]

APPENDIX VII.

Solicitors’ Accounts (Amendment) Regulations, 1961 (S.I. No. 51 of 1961).

19 Iúil, 1962.

A Chara,

I am directed by the Select Committee on Statutory Instruments to refer to the Solicitors’ Accounts (Amendment) Regulations, 1961 [S.I. No. 51 of 1961].

It appears to the Select Committee that the Council of the Incorporated Law Society of Ireland may, by virtue of the powers assumed under article 5 of the regulations, approve of any person it pleases as an accountant for the purposes of the regulations and that there is no obligation imposed on the Council to approve only of persons with recognised professional qualifications. The Committee wishes to be furnished with a memorandum explaining the significance of this provision.

The Select Committee also observes that the regulations are stated to have been made “with the concurrence of the President of the High Court”. Section 66(1) of the parent statute prescribes that such regulations “shall be made with the concurrence of the Chief Justice”. The Committee assumes that this function has been delegated by the Chief Justice to the President of the High Court under section 6(1) of the statute. If this is correct the Committee would be glad to have the observations of your Society on the absence of any intimation to that effect in the regulations.

Cléireach an Roghchoiste.

The Secretary,

Incorporated Law Society of Ireland,

Four Courts,

Dublin 7.

30th July, 1962.

The Clerk,

Select Committee on Statutory Instruments,

Seanad Éireann,

Dublin 2.

Dear Sir,

I refer to your letter of July 19th on the subject of the Solicitors’ Accounts (Amendment) Regulations, 1961 [S.I. No. 51 of 1961]. In reply to the point mentioned in the second paragraph of your letter I am directed to say that the Council in administering the Act and regulations have regard to the necessity of causing the minimum inconvenience to solicitors. While, no doubt, the majority of solicitors in having their accounts audited avail of the services of members of the Institute and Association mentioned in regulation 5, there are cases in which accounts are prepared and submitted by auditors who are not members of either of these bodies; it would be a hardship on a solicitor to refuse to accept such accounts if the Council are of the opinion that the auditor is competent and reliable. In operating the accounting statement provisions it is the practice of the Society to accept the accountant submitted by the solicitor if they are satisfied with him at the same time reserving power to refuse approval on proper grounds. The definition of the term “accountant” in clause 5 of the amending regulations was designed to serve this purpose.

With regard to your third paragraph the power to make rules is contained in the sections of the Solicitors’ Act, 1954, cited in the regulations. The concurring functions of the Chief Justice under the Solicitors’ Act, 1954, was transferred to the President of the High Court by section 25 of the Solicitors’ (Amendment) Act, 1960. Both Acts are to be read as one. In making regulations under the Acts it has not been the practice to cite the statutory authority for the concurring function. In view, however, of the point now raised by your committee I am seeking a direction from the President of the High Court as to whether in future regulations the statutory authority should be cited in the certificate at the foot of the regulations which he signs.