Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 17 Jun 1947

Vol. 106 No. 16

Courts of Justice Bill, 1947—Report and Final Stages.

Question:—"That the Bill be received for final consideration"—put and agreed to.

Question proposed: "That the Bill do now pass."

Mr. Cosgrave

I would like to say that I think there was general disappointment in the House that the Minister did not increase the salaries paid to district justices. Strong representations were made here on the Second Reading of the Bill that the increased allowances payable to district justices were insufficient to meet the present high cost of living. A case was put to the Minister for a flat rate of £1,500 a year in present circumstances and, strong as the case was a fortnight or three weeks ago, the cost-of-living figures make the case then made even stronger. The salaries of district justices originally fixed in 1924 were, I think, £1,000 a year for most justices—a few exceptions were as low as £800 and some were as high as £1,100 a year. The present cost of living makes it quite obvious that the figure then fixed would need to be increased by at least 50 per cent. While substantial increases have been given to Circuit Court, High Court and Supreme Court judges, taking the cost of living into consideration and comparing their salaries with the salaries paid to district justices, I think it is obvious that while they may occupy a position in a superior court, the district justices have not been fairly treated. I put the case to the Minister that I could see no reason for differentiating between justices in the metropolitan area and other district justices. I still adhere to that view, particularly since the districts and areas of jurisdiction of the district justices have been altered. The amount of work done by a district justice, sitting outside the metropolitan area and certainly sitting in close proximity to the larger cities, is equal, if not in some cases even heavier, than the work carried out by justices in the Dublin metropolitan area. At the same time country justices, while they are paid a travelling allowance or expenses from the point of view of running a motor car, have considerable expenditure. They have to maintain certain standards and all these expenses fall more lightly on justices in Dublin than they do on country justices who have to travel from one town or village to another. I think it is unfortunate that the Minister has not seen fit to alter the present rate from £1,300 a year in the majority of cases to £1,500.

Another matter to which I would like to refer, in view of the strong appeal made here by Deputy Costello, in view of the appeal before the belated withdrawal of Deputy O'Connor, and finally in view of the appeal by Deputy Ruttledge, is that the Minister should again consider the question of appointing the President of the Circuit Court to one of the positions on the High Court. As the Bill stands the President of the Circuit Court will be ex officio a judge of the High Court. In view of the fact that the High Court has, on occasion, to deal with appeals from the Circuit Court and the individual judges hear appeals the position differs entirely from the position of the President of the High Court who may, on occasion, hear appeals from the Supreme Court from his brethren on the High Court who will then be only individual judges out of four or five and I think the Minister should reconsider the position. Nobody wants to derogate in any way from the peculiar new status that is being given to the President of the Circuit Court. But, in view of the fact that the President of the Circuit Court may, in his ex officio capacity as a judge of the High Court, be called upon to hear appeals from his brethren of the Circuit Court, it is undesirable in the circumstances that he should be an ex officio judge of the High Court.

Deputy Costello and Deputy Ruttledge strongly appealed to the Minister on this matter. It was fully discussed, and all the disadvantages arising out of the ex officio position which the President of the Circuit Court will have when sitting as a judge of the High Court have been put before the Minister. So far no strong case has been made for appointing the President of the Circuit Court as an ex officio judge of the High Court, and I put it to the Minister that, unless a stronger case can be put forward than that which the House has already heard, it would be in the interest of the position which the President of the Circuit Court will occupy that he should not be an ex officio judge of the High Court.

Mr. M.E. Dockrell

I should like to support what Deputy Cosgrave has raised concerning the district justices. The ground has been covered on previous stages of the Bill, but I should like to add my voice in support of what the Deputy has said. It does seem that there is very little case to be made for paying a district justice who operates in the City of Dublin more than a district justice who operates outside the city, but perhaps still in the County Dublin. That justice has to incur the same expenses as the Dublin justice and, in fact, has a somewhat further distance to travel, but actually receives less money. That is an anomaly which it seems hard to understand. There may be a case for the lower payment where a district justice lives in a remote part of Ireland and where living is, presumably, cheaper than in the city. Nevertheless, even in that case, against his somewhat cheaper living which would only really cover food, you have to set the increased amount of travelling which he has to do. I would ask the Minister, therefore, to consider this matter and perhaps introduce some slight levelling in regard to the country district justices to bring them closer to the salary which the city justices receive.

Mr. Boland

The question of the district justices was discussed at length on the Committee Stage and on the Second Stage. I do not agree that there is not a case for differentiation there. From all I hear, it is the experience of those who have worked in the Dublin court that the work there is far more onerous. Whatever about getting an increase for the district justices over and above what is proposed in this Bill, I think there is a case for differentiation. I think that practically everyone who goes to the Dublin court knows that it is a most trying place for anybody, while a country justice has a comparatively easy place compared with it.

If I had my choice I would prefer to be one of the country justices at the smaller salary. I also pointed out on the Second Reading that the 30 per cent. increase that has been given compares favourably with what has been given to other public officials with a like salary. In fact, it is more favourable. These are matters upon which the Minister for Finance and the Government have to be consulted and there was no case made that we could find for giving more proportionately to them than was given to other officials. A bigger bulk sum has been given to judges, but a smaller proportion. It is 25 per cent. in the case of a Circuit Court judge, 20 per cent. in the case of a High Court judge and 15 per cent. in the case of a Supreme Court judge. The district justices get 30 per cent.

As to the question of the President of the Circuit Court, I still hold that what is proposed is quite a desirable thing to do. It gives him the status that he ought to have in the new position. I can see no point whatever in the objection. Even if he has to hear appeals from the Circuit Court, which might not happen often, what would be wrong with that? Is it not well known that High Court judges hear appeals from other High Court judges? In the Court of Appeal there are often High Court judges who hear appeals from other High Court judges. I can see nothing to object to in that. As I said, it is not likely that the President of the Circuit Court will be called upon to sit very often in the High Court. The High Court is full. It is only in the unlikely contingency of there being an accumulation of work or perhaps some judge being ill that I imagine he will be asked to sit in the High Court. He will have plenty to do in his own court. As I said on the Committee Stage, it is purely for the purpose of his prestige and status that this is being done. I considered the matter very carefully. I heard the appeals made from both sides of the House, from my predecessor amongst others; but we considered this matter very carefully and we consider that it is a desirable thing to have the president occupying that ex officio position.

Question put and agreed to.