Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 21 Apr 1932

Vol. 41 No. 4

In Committee on Finance. - Vote 38—Circuit Court.

I move:

Go ndeontar suim ná raghaidh thar £36,809 chun slánuithe na suime is gá chun íoctha an Mhuirir a thiocfaidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31adh lá de Mhárta, 1933, chun Tuarastail agus. Liúntaisí agus Costaisí Oifigeacha Cúirte Cuarda, Leas-Bhreithiún gCuarda agus Udarásanna Clárathachta Aitiúla áirithe agus chun costaisí Ath-fhéachainte Liostaí Vótalaithe agus Coisteoirí (Uimh. 27 de 1926, etc.).

That a sum not exceeding £36,809 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1933, for the Salaries, Allowances and Expenses of Circuit Court Officers, Deputy Circuit Judges, and certain Local Registering Authorities, and the expenses of Revision of Voters and Jurors Lists (No. 27 of 1926, etc.).

The amount of this Estimate is £3,650 less than last year. Relatively that is not a considerable figure. The details of how it is arrived at are available here if they interest any Deputy in the House.

I wonder would I be in order in asking the Minister on this Vote a question that intimately concerns us, and with which the Minister is quite well acquainted, that is the introduction of a Bill to amend the Courts of Justice Acts in regard to the hearing of appeals? It is quite unnecessary for me to remind the Minister as to the urgency of this measure.

On these Estimates, the Deputy cannot criticise existing legislation or advocate new legislation.

Would I be in order, on the same point, in asking the Minister if he can say what action he is taking or proposing to take on the report of the Courts of Justice Commission?

That question is quite in order.

Would I be in order in asking the Minister if he has considered or proposes to consider any steps which the Government might take to put an end to the enormous arrears of work which are piling up on some of the Circuit Court Judges, to provide means to bring litigation up to date, if I may use that expression, so that litigants will not have cases outstanding for twelve and eighteen months, particularly in consideration of the fact that in rural areas pending litigation is a fertile source of graver things? I will not go further than that. I invite the Minister to give that matter his consideration.

I take it Deputy Morrissey's question covers what I intended to ask the Minister.

In answer to Deputy McMenamin and Deputy Morrissey, I propose at a comparatively early date carefully to read the report of the Committee to which the Deputies have referred and also to read the evidence on which that report is based. I may say that previous to accepting the office I now fill, I had read that report and evidence in perhaps a more or less cursory way. It will be necessary for me to devote a good deal more thought to the report and to the transcript of the evidence given by the various witnesses before I would feel justified in making any announcement as to what I would propose to do. I will not leave the House under the impression that I can in the very near future give that report or that evidence the amount of consideration that I think the report and the volume of evidence deserve, but as soon as what appear to be more urgent matters have been dealt with by me I certainly shall consider that report with very great care. In answer to Deputy Dillon's observation, I am of course inclined to accept any statement that Deputy Dillon would make but I am afraid that I cannot assent to the statement that there are enormous arrears of work in the Circuit Courts. I will not deny it if any Deputy here who is perhaps more familiar with the work of the Circuit Courts than I am asserts it, but in so far as my knowledge extends I am not aware, and I certainly did not think up to a few minutes ago, that there were enormous arrears—arrears, perhaps, but not enormous arrears. Deputy Dillon stated that there are cases in the Circuit Courts which were started twelve or eighteen months ago and which have not yet come to hearing. I feel that such cases that have been waiting twelve or eighteen months cannot be numerous and are probably exceptional in their nature.

In support of Deputy Dillon's statement I would like to point out to the Minister for Justice that in the Kildare Circuit Court there are constant postponements of trials due to overcrowding and the short time available to the Circuit Court judge. That involves additional expense for the litigants travelling there and not having their cases tried. I must support Deputy Dillon in his contention in reference to overcrowding and loss of time in the trial of cases such as he refers to.

I would suggest to Deputy Dillon that if there is this delay in the hearing of cases in the Circuit Court he might put a question asking the Minister how many cases there are in arrears or that have been in arrears for twelve months or thereabouts. As far as I know, and of course my experience carries me on a certain length, I do not think there is that number of arrears that he has suggested or that there has been any breakdown at all in the Circuit Court system. As far as I know from all the information which ever was at my disposal it has been working and it still is working easily and smoothly and the Circuit Court bench is now adequately manned. That certainly is the conclusion I came to.

In regard to the question put forward by Deputy Morrissey, the question about the Bill which it is suggested should be introduced to carry out the recommendations of the Committee, I would like to get a little more definite information from the Minister. After all the report is a very short document which can be mastered in a reasonable time. The evidence, I grant, is comparatively long, but I would like to know if the Minister considers it necessary that he should go through all the evidence and how long he estimates it will take him to go through that evidence? I would like also to draw the Minister's attention to the fact that there was in the hands of the Parliamentary draftsman some time ago a Bill embodying the recommendations of that Commission partially drafted. I am not in a position to say how far it had been drafted, but it had been some time in the Parliamentary draftsman's hands. I would ask the Minister to see that particular draft, get it from the Parliamentary draftsman, consider it and see if he could not expedite matters rather than tell us that he will at some unnamed date read through this report, that at some further off date he will consider it, and that at some still further off date he will introduce legislation.

I had in mind when I inquired of the Minister not only the actual Circuit Courts themselves but also the Appeals Court which is specially designed for the hearing of Circuit Court appeals. I recognise that it is possible that I should have referred to that under the heading of the High Court. In regard to the Circuit Court itself I would not use the expression eighteen months or twelve months' delay, but I would say that in the Circuit Court itself there is great and inconvenient delay, that litigants are put to an unnecessary expense and unnecessary inconvenience in coming to the courts, sometimes day after day and in then finding that their cases have been squeezed into the list for the next session.

May I add that business men have been complaining for some years of the delays, not alone in the Circuit Courts but in the Circuit Appeals Court? I would like the Minister to look into this matter and, perhaps, he could do something to facilitate the users of these courts.

I think Deputy Dillon unintentionally confused two matters. He was talking about delays in the Circuit Court, but I think he really meant the delay in the hearing of appeals from the Circuit Court. I know something about the Circuit Courts, and there has been no undue delay in the Circuit Courts.

Question!

I speak with an experience of 40 years of the old County Courts, and in later years the Circuit Courts, and I say there has been less delay in the Circuit Courts than at any time within my experience. What I think Deputy Dillon was thinking of was the delay in hearing Circuit Court appeals. He was really confusing two matters. The delay in hearing Circuit Court appeals has become an intolerable burden. It has been used to blackmail the public. The delay has been used to get people out of paying their lawful debts. Bogus appeals have been lodged, and until this matter is firmly and promptly dealt with the public generally will be labouring under a grievance.

With regard to the Circuit Court judges, they have done everything humanly possible to convenience the public. They have done all that possibly could be done to render attendance at the Circuit Courts more easy. I can speak for different Circuit Courts, and I know that beforehand the judges arrange a programme and that programme is carried out so well that so far as the convenience of the public is concerned the Circuit Courts to-day are a great credit to the Government and to the Minister for Justice. I wish I could say the same of Circuit Court appeals. I honestly cannot. This complaint in regard to Circuit Court appeals. I honestly cannot. This complaint in regard to Circuit Court appeals has been referred to time and again during the last one and a half years. I do not think that the Minister for Justice is quite as guilty as his predecessor in regard to the delay. If I remember correctly, we had from his predecessor an undertaking some time in October or November that the new Bill would be in the House last December.

We have not seen it yet. I think if Deputy Fitzgerald-Kenney looks at the records he will find there was an undertaking given by him that we would have the Bill before the close of the session. I do not want to blame anybody, because I know the position is full of difficulties. I suggest that if the Minister finds on reading the report of the Commission that there is perhaps one section that will require from him and the members of the Executive Council some time for consideration, he could eliminate that for the moment and get on with the remainder of the report. What Deputy Dillon has stated is quite right. It is a scandal and a disgrace to have the Circuit Court appeals hanging over for 12 or 18 months and even longer.

I would like to mention that the opinions expressed in the report issued by the Commission were perfectly unanimous. The Morrissey Committee sat for 12 months and it succeeded in doing a most marvellous thing. It was representative of all sections of the Dáil and Seanad and it brought in an absolutely unanimous report. That report has been lying there for one and a half years and it has not been carried into effect. I am not making special reference to any particular part of the report, but I know there are sections of it that are absolutely non-contentious. Why not embody them in a Bill and have them carried into effect?

A Deputy is not permitted to advocate legislation when discussing an Estimate.

I am not advocating legislation. I am suggesting that in order to cut down the expenses of the Circuit Court it might be necessary that the report should be implemented. I will not put it beyond that. I think we may leave it there and trust to the Minister. We must give him a chance. He has not got a fair chance until now. I think if he does get a chance we will find the machinery of the Circuit Court working far more smoothly than it has been up to the present. So far there have been a number of Circuit Court Rules established. Those Rules have caused confusion and some delay and a breakdown in the administration of the Circuit Court. I think if we could get from the Minister an undertaking that he will try to have a new set of Circuit Court Rules established and so have appeals more quickly heard——

Without legislation?

It is up to the Minister to say how it is to be done. If he brings about that change I think it will give considerable satisfaction to all parties and will meet with general approval in the country.

I would like to urge upon the Minister that it is necessary a decision should be come to as soon as possible on that report. I would like to remind him that witnesses representing the commercial and industrial life of the country and the agricultural and labour interests were examined before the Commission. They were unanimously of the opinion that a change was urgently necessary. I appeal to the Minister to deal with the matter as soon as possible and not put it on the long finger.

This is really an urgent matter. I am intimately connected with the work of the Circuit Courts with regard to which there have been some comments this evening. I could not concur with the suggestion that the work of the Circuit Courts has been in any way neglected. I speak from experience. There are no unnecessary arrears in the Circuit Court any more than there were in the County Courts heretofore. With regard to appeals, I wish to support Deputy Wolfe. The Bill that has been referred to is, I believe, somewhere in the pigeon-holes and I would like the Minister to implement the report of the Commission at the earliest possible moment.

In view of what has developed since Deputy Dillon put a question to the Minister, I would like to make it perfectly clear that as far as I am concerned there was no reflection on the capacity or the efficiency of the judge on the Kildare Circuit. On the contrary, he is a very excellent judge, extremely popular with all who come before him.

What about the prisoners?

I would like the Minister to meet the lawyers from South Kildare and hear what they have to say of the frightful inconvenience caused to litigants living 22½ miles from the court and having constant postponements due to the pressure of work. Needless to say, that is very expensive and is the cause of great dissatisfaction.

As regards what Deputy Minch has said it might perhaps be regretted by the lawyers in the County Kildare if I were to meet them, because I might ask them for instances as to the arrears that existed under the County Court system. I might also ask them to give me an estimate of the cases where witnesses did not turn up or of cases where the solicitor or counsel had other engagements. Perhaps I should not pursue that aspect of the matter too far. Deputy Fitzgerald-Kenney has stated quite accurately, if I may say so, that the report of the Committee can be mastered in a short time. I venture to think that I have a pretty good grasp of the report. I am afraid I do not agree with Deputy Fitzgerald-Kenney in so far as he suggests that it is not necessary to go through the evidence. I think it is my duty to go very carefully through the evidence of the various witnesses. They were, as Deputy Morrissey stated, gentlemen of great eminence in their particular callings. The views even of the witnesses, whose testimony may not have commended itself to the Committee as a whole, must, I feel, be considered by me.

Another matter that I must consider is this: How I will bring any change, if there is to be a change, into true relation with the impoverished condition of the country? If I had abundant means at my command I could suggest various ways in which cases could be dealt with most expeditiously in every court, and whereby appeals would be heard very rapidly and with little expense. I have to consider that, and it is a matter that will require a good deal of thought. Deputy Fitzgerald-Kenney has stated that there is already a Bill which is substantially in draft. and that I might perhaps get the Parliamentary draftsman to expedite the final drafting of it. It is a fair observation to make, because it really has not to do with legislation. It is part of the work which has to be done. I am perhaps more familiar with the particular details than Deputy Fitzgerald-Kenney can have been.

Deputy Fitzgerald-Kenney had a number of matters of far-reaching importance to attend to last year, and he may not be aware that the Parliamentary draftsman has merely drafted what may be described as the non-contentious portions of the Bill. Deputy Fitzgerald-Kenney was not at any time able to give the Parliamentary draftsman instructions as to the substantial part of the Bill, that part that was likely to prove contentious. It is fair that the House and the public should know that. It is also only fair to the very distinguished member of the Bar who occupies the position of Parliamentary draftsman. It is not a matter of expediting the Parliamentary drafts man's work. He is certainly well abreast of his work. The next step must be mine, and the next step after that, if it comes to the House, must rest with this House.

Deputy Dillon has complained about the great and inconvenient delays that occur in regard to the hearing of appeals. I am not able to say at the moment how many appeals there are to be heard or how long these appeals are waiting. Deputy Good has made observations in relation to which I think I should say something. What he said was that business men had been complaining about these delays for seven years.

For several years.

I wonder have they ceased complaining? What have the business men to complain about now? Whatever grievances the unfortunate peasant may have or whatever grievance some individual like that may have, I fail to see what difficulty there is in expeditiously obtaining a judgment in any claim for a liquidated amount at present, provided that the business man has his ledgers in order and has his books in court and his witnesses available.

May I explain for a moment? It occurs in this way—the business man gets a verdict in the Circuit Court. Immediately the defendant or person against whom the verdict has been granted gives notice of appeal. Owing to the congested state of the Appeals Court that appeal is not heard in some cases for twelve months and in certain cases for even eighteen months. The result is that it is exceedingly unfair to the business man that he should be compelled to lie during this length of time without his money which is obviously due to him.

What I understand by the businessman's case is generally speaking the usual type of commercial case such as recovering the price of goods sold and delivered, or for work and labour done under contract, or in a quantum meruit. Cases like that are usually very clear either way. It is perfectly clear that a merchant is entitled to his judgment or it is equally clear that through slackness of bookkeeping or the failure to adduce the essential proof of the debt that the decision is so rickety that it cannot stand.

That is not what we complain of at all. It is the other difficulty.

Where it is perfectly clear and where the businessman has done his part I would like to know if there has been any case where an application to expedite the hearing of such a crystal clear appeal has been refused? Appeals are not necessarily taken in their turn. The total number of appeals is probably about 400 a year. The percentage of them that could be described as businessmen's cases must. I think, be relatively trifling. At all events I think that the business community ought to exhaust the possibilities of having the hearing of appeals accelerated before they make complaints.

If the Minister will look up the records he will find that the businessmen have drawn the attention of his predecessor to the necessity of doing something on this matter. They have drawn his attention to it on several occasions during the last few years.

And there was evidence of that before the Committee.

I am not prepared to deny the existence of some case, but that these cases loom large I will not admit.

I think the Minister will see it from a different angle when he looks into the matter more fully.

I assure you that I shall look very carefully into what Deputy Good has complained of. I am reluctant to give any undertaking for the reason that Deputy Wolfe has suggested. My predecessor in a moment of optimism on 27th May, 1931——

Deputy Fitzgerald-Kenney as an optimist! Who ever heard of it?

On 27th May, 1931, my predecessor gave an undertaking that by last autumn a Bill in reference to this matter would be prepared and introduced into this House.

Will the Minister read my answer? Was there a definite undertaking? I was very careful never to give undertakings, and I am glad to see the Minister imitating me and modelling himself upon me. Always express pious hopes.

The question put to the Minister on the Estimates last year was: "Will the Minister have it by the autumn?" The reply of the Minister was: "I hope so."

Might I suggest to the Minister that the advocating of legislation on the Estimates is not permissible?

That is all I have to say in reply.

Vote agreed to.
Top
Share