1. Has the Law Society received legal advice that it may lawfully bailout the SMDF?
2. Has the Law Society received legal advice that it may lawfully levy the cost of the bailout of the SMDF on solicitors?
3. Has the Law Society received legal advice that it may lawfully make that levy without any statutory power additional to its current powers?
4. Is any such legal advice based on cited legal authority?
5. What, if any, are the cited authorities?
6. From which branch of the profession does the advice come?
7. Will the Society release to the public the legal advice it has received relating to its proposal to bail out the SMDF?
8. Has the Law Society accessed the financial records of the SMDF?
9. Does the Law Society think that a liquidator should be appointed to SMDF?
10. If not, how does the Law Society think it should be managed and wound up?
11. Is it satisfied that the directors of SMDF are without fault in the collapse of SMDF?
12. Does the law Society think that the current directors should continue to manage SMDF?
13. Does the Law Society think that the Central Bank should be asked to make an independent report on the management of SMDF?
14. Does the Law Society accept that the Insurance Compensation Fund is not accessible by the SMDF?
15. Does the Law Society think that all SMDF reinsurance contracts will fall if SMDF goes into liquidation? If so, why?
16. Does the Law Society share the opinions of its appointed representative, Mr. Stuart Gilhooly, as expressed on twitter, on the subject of the SMDF:
a. that there could be an independent investigation of the SMDF?
b. that payment of individual “excess” money to an SMDF liquidator can be ring fenced and allocated only to secure the benefit of the SMDF reinsurance contracts? In other words, that SMDF can continue in business even in liquidation?
c. That the Law Society has the power to levy its members to bailout the SMDF?
d. By implication, that that power does not extend to non-members?