Committee Reports > List of Committees > Seanad > 1969 > Select Committee on Statutory Instruments (Appointed 7 July 1965) > Report No. 04 - Statutory Instruments [26]

APPENDIX I.

Solicitors’ Accounts Regulations, 1967 (S.I. No. 44 of 1967).

The Secretary,

Incorporated Law Society of Ireland,

Solicitors’ Buildings,

Four Courts,

Dublin 7.

A Chara,

The Select Committee on Statutory Instruments has been considering the Solicitors’ Accounts Regulations, 1967 (S.I. No. 44 of 1967) and has instructed me to ask you to furnish a memorandum explaining Article 20 (3) of the instrument.

The Committee notes that Article 20 (3) enables the Council to require a complainant to lodge “a reasonable sum to be fixed by the Council to cover the costs and expenses of the inspection and of the solicitor against whom the complaint is made” and provides that “the Council may deal with any sum so paid in such manner as they think fit”. While the Committee concedes that it is reasonable that a person who makes a groundless complaint should be liable for costs it is surprised that the Regulations give to a genuine complainant no right to recover the payment made by him or any part of it if in fact his complaint is substantiated. The Committee would appreciate the assistance of your comments on this point.

The Committee wishes also to be advised as to the precise provision in the Solicitors Act, 1954 on which the Council relies for its authority for Article 20 (3).

Cléireach an Roghchoiste.

8th August, 1967.

The Clerk,

Select Committee on Statutory Instruments,

Seanad Éireann,

Dublin 2.

Dear Sir,

I refer to your letter of August 8th on the subject of the Solicitors Accounts Regulations, 1967 (S.I. No. 44 of 1967). Article 20 (3) was made with the concurrence of the President of the High Court under the authority of section 66 of the Solicitors’ Act 1954 in particular clauses (d) and (e) thereof. It is considered that the power to require complainant to make a deposit to cover the expenses of the inspection is an an ancillary and subsidiary matter and part of the general machinery of the rules. Article 20 (3) may be compared with Article 6 (d) of the English Solicitors Accounts Regulations, 1934 made under the authority of section 1 of the English Solicitors Act, 1933 which is similar to section 66 of our Act.

These provisions have been in operation since 1955. The 1967 Regulations are amending consolidating regulations. The object of paragraph (3) of Article 20 is to discourage unreasonable and unnecessary complaints of which there is an appreciable number from time to time. It may well be considered reasonable that a genuine complainant should be entitled to recover his deposit or part of it but the following matter should be borne in mind. Paragraph (3) of Article 20 has never been operated since 1955 and I cannot see any circumstances in which it is likely to be used. It is replaced by the provision of Article 18 under which the Society are entitled to require the solicitor himself to furnish an individual accountant’s certificate any time and the general provisions of part 4 which require solicitors taking out practising certificates annually to furnish accounts’ certificates to the Society. Under Article 20 the Council may on their own motion without any written complaint require a solicitor to submit his books to an audit and inspection at any time during the year and should the occasion arise they would certainly do so for the protection of the Compensation Fund which is liable for losses due to solicitors’ defalcations.

11th September, 1967.