Tagged: Legal profession
The Minister for Health is planning to restrict the advertising of cigarettes. There are good reasons to think he is not moving fast enough. Read this letter of September last from the Association of Attorney Generals (of the USA) asking the Food and Drug Administration to control the promotion of e-cigarettes. This is reminiscent of the great tobacco litigation of the USA beautifully represented by the Statement of Claim of the Minnesota Attorney General. See the documents in that case […]
No, this post is not about hangovers. It’s about evidence. Ideas as to what is evidence have varied, somewhat, over time. (SPOILER ALERT) For instance, “Murder comes to Pemberley” by P. D. James, features a trial scene. Mr. Wickham, a character from Jane Austen’s “Pride & Prejudice” is on trial for murder. The implied date of the trial is approximately 1804. The UK lacked a police force at that time. The local magistrate has performed the police function and he […]
Show business is very old. Arguably, the first philosophers were in that business. If what you say is important, you need to ensure that as many people hear it as is possible. Socrates, for instance, worked in the Athenian Agora. He had at least one location there where he conducted his dialogues; it was in the metal-working stall of a friend. This was a modest affair in comparison to the then current big entertainments, sport and the theatre, but the […]
The Irish system underpinning the recovery of costs in Irish litigation is derived from British practice and systems but lags behind developments there. The basic principle is that the client is responsible for paying his or her costs and may only recover those costs in the event of winning. The corollary of the second leg of the prior sentence is that the client is responsible for ALL costs in the event of losing. That means that the client is liable […]
Ireland is a small place; we should be temperate in our comments because we may offend where no offence is meant and our reduced “degrees of separation” makes the comment fester.
Will the Society release to the public the legal advice it has received relating to its proposal to bailout the SMDF?
n short, to repeat, currently the Law Society of Ireland has no power to lawfully compel the payment of the levy to make up the SMDF insolvency shortfall.
That SMDF has failed is, of course, of great concern. It was promoted by the Law Society of Ireland. Its directors were, invariably, past Presidents of the Law Society. Arguably, the failure of the SMDF is a failure of the Law Society. But that is not to say that the Law Society’s members are responsible for that failure. The members had no method of seeking accountability for the activities of the SMDF or the Law Society’s failures relating to it. (Even the High Court is constrained here; the Law Society of Ireland is a corporate body, but a very unusual one; it is not subject to the provisions of the Companies Acts. Most of the jurisdiction of the High Court over corporate bodies is derived from those Acts).
Of course, what Eoin O’Dell is too courteous to point out is that it is not an attractive human feature to try to avoid paying, or properly paying, for a service, but that is a vain complaint in the knowledge that some people contract, through the internet, with anonymous suppliers of drugs…