asked the Minister for Justice if he is aware that cases which can be dealt with by the District Courts having regard to the increased jurisdiction provided by the Courts of Justice Act, 1953, are still being heard in the Circuit Court due to the fact that no scale of costs has been fixed for the District Court, and, if so, whether he will have the matter attended to as soon as possible.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - District Court Jurisdiction.
The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. Question of costs fall to be regulated by the rule-making authority, which, in this case, consists of the District Court Rules Committee with the concurrence of the Minister for Justice. The delay in making rules as to the costs to be allowed to solicitors for business coming within the extended jurisdiction of the District Court is due to the fact that neither my predecessor nor I have been able to see our way to concur in the committee's specific proposals. These proposals, apart from other considerations, would have the effect of increasing the existing costs, that is to say, the costs allowed to solicitors for business within the former jurisdiction of the District Court—an increase for which I find it hard to see the justification. I should add that the rules committee and I are trying to resolve our differences in a spirit of mutual goodwill and I hope a decision may soon be reached.
Is the Minister aware that, at present, hardship is being imposed on the poorer sections of the community as a result of the fact that no decision has been reached with regard to costs and would the Minister take steps to see that agreement is reached at the earliest possible opportunity?
It is to prevent undue hardship that I have refused to agree with the rule-making authority's proposal.
Would the Minister tell me what is the use of extending the powers of the District Court if, as a result of the opposition of the legal profession, the terms of the Act are being nullified and no benefit is being conferred on the poorer people?
Would the Minister consider the advisability of publicising the scale of charges in all courts functioning in this land?
That seems to be a separate question.
It is a very simple question, in my opinion, and one that should be answered publicly in this House because the public are entitled to know the scale of costs charged in all courts.
Can we take it that a decision will be made at the earliest possible opportunity?
I assure the Deputy that I hope, with mutual goodwill, an agreement may be made soon that will be satisfactory to all.