As I said when introducing this Bill in the Dáil, it is not one which lends itself to the kind of debate usual on Second Reading, as it deals with a number of distinct and unconnected matters. The purpose of this Bill is to effect certain amendments of the Court Officers Act, 1926, which experience of the working of the system set up under that Act has shown to be desirable. I shall try to explain as briefly as I can the various provisions of the Bill.
Under Sections 2 and 3 it is proposed to take power to enable the Minister for Justice to relieve the Master of the High Court of the purely administrative functions and duties in relation to the central office and the other offices of the High Court which are vested in him at present by Sections 4 and 5 of the 1926 Act. The Minister will be able to exercise this power only after he has consulted the President of the High Court. If an Order is made relieving the Master of the administrative duties, these duties will then be performed by an officer of the High Court who will be nominated for that purpose by the Minister, again after consultation with the President. The judicial control provided for in the 1926 Act, so far as the conduct of business in court is concerned, is being fully preserved.
Sections 4 and 5 deal with the pension terms of a limited class of court officers, namely, the Master of the High Court, the taxing masters of that court, and county registrars. These officers are at present pensionable under the Superannuation Acts on ordinary Civil Service terms, which means that they can qualify for full pension only with a minimum of 40 years' service. The Act of 1926 lays down, as an essential qualification for appointment to any of the offices in question, a minimum period of practice in the legal profession—in the case of the Master of the High Court, ten years' practice at the Bar, and in the case of taxing masters and county registrars, ten and eight years' practice, respectively, as solicitors. The earliest possible age at which appointments can be made is, therefore, about 30 or slightly over. In practice the persons appointed are usually older; in the case of county registrars, for example, the average age on appointment has been about 40. The result is that, under Superannuation Act terms, few, if any, of these officers can hope to qualify for full pension, and, where the person has been appointed at a fairly advanced age, his pension is very meagre altogether.
Under Section 4, it is now proposed that these officers should have the same pension terms as district justices enjoy under the Courts of Justice Act, 1936, viz., full pension of two-thirds of salary after 30 years' service, and proportionately for shorter service. Section 5 makes special provision for existing officers, who are being given the right to opt in due course between the new terms and their present terms.
Section 6 proposes to amend the present law as contained in Sections 23 and 24 of the 1926 Act, relating to the qualifications for appointment to the posts of probate officer and examiner in the High Court. At present a person to be qualified for appointment must be a serving court officer with a minimum of 12 years' service in the court offices. Section 6 proposes two amendments, viz., (i) it dispenses with the requirement of 12 years' service in the case of any court officer who is a barrister or solicitor, and (ii) it opens up appointments to barristers and solicitors of not less than six years' standing provided that the Minister for Justice, after consulting the President of the High Court, is satisfied that at the time there is no court officer with the necessary qualifications suitable to be appointed.
The object of Section 7 is to enable a second examiner to be appointed in the High Court. The work at present done in the examiner's office is the same as was formerly done by the two chief clerks on the chancery side and their staffs. What is now proposed is, in effect, a return to the system of two chief officers. Actually, this does not mean the creation of an additional post. So long as there are two judges doing "chancery" work, it is convenient to have a fully responsible officer attached to each judge. At present the examiner attends one judge, and the assistant-examiner the other. The law and practice require that certain final steps be done by the examiner in person, so that at present when the assistant-examiner has done the work, he must submit his papers to the examiner before the case can be finally disposed of. The only way by which this can be avoided is by the appointment of a second examiner, which will be made possible by Section 7. In practice, it will mean the conversion of the assistant-examinership into an examinership.
Section 8, which was introduced during the Committee Stage in the Dáil, provides that officers of the Central Office of the High Court nominated to be registrars will rank as principal officers. It was suggested that these registrars should be regarded as principal officers for the purposes of the 1926 Act, and no objection was seen to making this minor concession. No question of alteration in rank or pay is involved.
Section 9 enables the Minister for Justice to require any court officer to perform the duties of another office attached to his own or any other court, where such an arrangement is convenient and practicable. Provision is made for consultation, where necessary, with the Chief Justice and the President of the High Court, and retrospective sanction is provided for certain arrangements of the kind in question that have been made in the past with doubtful legal authority.
Section 10 proposes that the assignment of county registrars to particular counties should be a matter for the Government rather than the Minister for Justice, as it is at present. A county registrar is appointed by the Government and there is no point in the Minister for Justice having to make a formal separate assignment to the only county in which a vacancy exists at the time the appointment is made. In practice the Government will appoint expressly to the existing vacancy.
Section 11 is merely a machinery provision intended to remedy a minor defect in the existing statutory provisions relating to the revision or alteration of district court districts or areas.
With regard to Section 12, since the enactment of the 1926 Act, no appointment has been made to the office of under-sheriff. According as vacancies occurred in that office, the duties were taken over by the County Registrar for the County or County Borough in accordance with Section 54 of the 1926 Act. This system has worked well on the whole, but in the case of Dublin and, to a lesser extent, of Cork, the duties of the County Registrar are already so heavy that it is not desirable that he should also be made responsible for the duties of under-sheriff. It may also happen in the course of time, in some of the other larger counties, that the double duties of County Registrar and under-sheriff will prove too exacting for one officer. Accordingly, it is proposed in Section 12 to take power to enable a County Registrar, to whom the duties of under-sheriff have already been transferred, to be relieved of the whole or part of those duties and also, as regards any county in which an under-sheriff is still operating, to enable an order to be made, if thought necessary, declaring that the provisions of Section 54 of the 1926 Act shall not apply so that the County Registrar will not be vested with the under-sheriff's duties on the latter vacating office. In any such case it is proposed that the Government may appoint a person to be sheriff and he will be responsible for such of the duties, functions, etc., of the former under-sheriff as are not vested in the County Registrar.
Section 13 provides for the repeal of Section 45 of the Debtors (Ireland) Act, 1840. Section 45 required every under-sheriff to nominate a deputy resident or with an office within one mile of the Four Courts for the receipt of writs, decrees, etc. In modern conditions this requirement is unnecessary. Compliance with it involves some trouble administratively every time a County Registrar takes over an undersheriff's duties. Repeal of the provision will mean a small saving to the Exchequer as the deputy nominated for each County Registrar is allowed to retain a proportion of the lodgment fees which would otherwise be surrendered to the Exchequer. The Incorporated Law Society and all the officers concerned have been consulted and there is unanimity of opinion that this out-of-date provision may be repealed.