Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 28 Mar 1928

Vol. 10 No. 10

PRIVATE BUSINESS. - BODIES CORPORATE (EXECUTORS) BILL, 1928.

I beg to move the Second Stage of the Bodies Corporate (Executors) Bill. The intention of the Bill is to put corporate bodies in the same position as individuals for the purpose of extracting probate, and, therefore, to facilitate the appointment of corporations as executors. In order to explain to the House the real object of this Bill it will be necessary to refer to the custom which is steadily growing of naming banks or other corporations as executors and trustees of a will. In some cases the corporate body is appointed solely, and in other cases jointly, with an individual, and this practice has spread very widely in the United States of America, and is now becoming pretty general in Great Britain. Its advantages have not yet become widely known in Ireland, but several of the Irish banks have departments which are specially equipped for the administration of estates and are ready to act as executors or trustees. The duties of executors have become, owing to gradual changes in the law, more onerous, with the result that testators have been more reluctant to ask their personal friends to undertake the duties, and their personal friends on the other hand have been much less willing to assume the responsibility. The reason why many persons are naming corporate bodies may be summed up briefly as follows:—It does away with the necessity of persuading friends to accept the responsibilities and anxieties of acting as executors. It provides an executor who is sure to act and who does not require changing. No new appointment of trustees is necessary on account of death or otherwise. New appointments involve expense. It provides against the possibility of any loss by fraud or investment in unauthorised securities. Where the corporate body appointed is a bank secrecy is secured for all transactions. The bank is always accessible, and the whole resources of the bank are security for the due performance of the work. As the law stands at present in the Saorstát it is quite possible for a bank or other corporate body to act as executor or trustee by appointing a representative to act for them, and, as I have already pointed out, this is being done, and will continue even if this Bill should fail to become law.

As the law now stands, however, there are no provisions enabling a corporate body, whether alone or jointly with an individual, to obtain a grant of probate, with the result that where a corporation is named executor in a will, administration with the will annexed must be granted to a syndic or nominee. This is an unsatisfactory proceeding which this Bill seeks to remedy by enabling corporations to act as executors either alone or jointly with individuals. This was done in Great Britain by the Administration of Justice Act, 1920, which does not apply to Ireland.

I have endeavoured to obtain the best legal advice in drafting this Bill, and the Bill has been submitted to the Attorney-General and has his personal approval. He hopes it will pass. The Rules of Court in the appendix were prepared in consultation with the probate officials, and I understand have their approval. I have not yet met anyone who was opposed to the principle of the Bill, and I trust it will have the unanimous approval of this House. I have, however, heard a fear expressed that where banks are acting as executors they will rely solely on their own solicitors and not have the advice of family or other solicitors in the administration of the estate. This is perhaps irrelevant, and does not strictly arise on this Bill, but I would like to say that as far as the Irish banks are concerned this fear is groundless, and in every case the banks advise the appointment of an outside solicitor. There is no danger whatever of the banks in any way ignoring solicitors in this matter, and I know it is their desire to act in close co-operation with the legal profession. In conclusion, I would like to emphasise the fact that the only object of this Bill is to simplify the law, and it does not give any power whatever to any bank or other corporate body to act as executor except where it has been explicitly named in the Bill. I beg to move that the Bodies Corporate (Executors) Bill do pass its Second Stage.

I second the motion. Senator Douglas has stated with complete accuracy the present state of the law on this subject. He has pointed out its defects and has also given the reasons which I think ought to appeal to the common sense of every member of the House to show that the legislation he proposes if not absolutely necessary would at least be for the public good. It is quite unnecessary for me to say anything in support of the motion.

I do not rise to oppose the Second Reading. I think the fact that Senator Brown is associated with Senator Douglas in the introduction of this Bill is in itself guarantee that the interests of certain friends of mine have not been lost sight of. I think I am on pretty strong ground if I suggest to both Senators the desirability when we reach the Committee Stage to refer certain provisions to a Select Committee for examination. If any amendments are to be inserted in the Bill they will necessarily be of a very technical character, and, therefore, it seems to me that our purpose would be better achieved by a small Select Committee to deal with the matter.

I am indebted to the courtesy of Senator Douglas for an advance copy of this Bill. I thoroughly approve of the Bill on behalf of the various institutions with which I am connected. There is no doubt that, so far as banks are concerned, the proposals in the Bill would be a very considerable advantage. At present there is no power in the country to grant probate of a will to a bank or any corporation. They have a roundabout method of procedure. As Senator Douglas has explained, probate has to be taken out by a nominee, who is called a syndic. Supposing the syndic dies or leaves the country, then there are complications. The proposals in the Bill would certainly simplify the administration of bodies corporate in so far as they place themselves in the position of executors or trustees. Undoubtedly there is very considerable difficulty in finding private individuals to act in this capacity, in view of the complications and the extraordinary responsibilities which would be imposed on them. If this Bill were passed it would assist in the reform which is gradually taking place by which private individuals make bodies corporate trustees or administrators. I trust the Bill will be agreed to. I am very glad to hear there is no intention or desire to interfere with the practice of family solicitors. That will go on, as Senator Brady assures us, as satisfactorily as ever. With regard to referring this Bill to a Select Committee, I would be guided very much in this matter by the views of Senator Douglas. I think the Bill is a good one, and the sooner it is passed into law the better it will be for public convenience.

I am in agreement with the purpose of the Bill. It is a simple measure and looks innocuous, but one fears that some safeguard may be essential in the interests of the community. I understand that in America this practice very largely prevails. I do not know whether it would be possible in this Bill to specify a scale of charges on which banks would be allowed to operate. I am told that in America they collect rentals at the rate of a half and one per cent. Are the banks in Ireland going to undertake to collect at such a rate, or are they going to inflict on people who submit estates to them charges which might be altogether out of relation to the capacity of the estate? I do not take it that these bodies corporate will act for love in these matters, and that they will be out to get some financial advantage. In giving them this right we should try to secure that the privilege they are going to exercise should be given at a rate commensurate with the capacity of the community to bear the burden which they are going to impose. I think the Bill is a very proper one, and I hope that some assurance will be given us in the course of the Committee Stage by the promoters as to the charges to be made under the Bill.

I think the question of charges referred to by Senator Bennett might be dealt with in the rules made in the Bill. For that reason I wonder why the promoters or drafters of the Bill included the rules at all.

Rules of Court?

Yes. According to sub-section (3) of Section 2, you pass an Act and give to an outside rule-making authority power to amend that Act to the extent that the rules are concerned. Unless we make rules by which we are prepared to stand I do not think we should make rules at all. It seems to me as a layman that the matter should be left to the rule-making authority, and if not that definite and binding the rules should be included in the Schedule rather than leave it to an outside authority to make Rules of Court that may annul these rules altogether or amend them. It is proposing to give a subsidiary body outside Parliament power to annul rules made by Parliament itself.

I would like to deal with the first point made by Senator O'Farrell. As under this Bill we are giving corporate bodies power to obtain grants of probate, it was necessary to add to the Rules of Court passed by this House certain rules which should come into effect at once —these other rules in the Schedule. Therefore they might put an amendment to this in the Schedule as an amendment to the Rules of Court. Once this amendment is passed it will put these rules in the same position as the other Rules of Court. With regard to the point raised by Senator Bennett, it is one in which I have a good deal of interest, and I would like to hear it discussed very fully in Committee— that is as to whether it would be wise or not to insert a special scale. I take it what the Senator means is a maximum scale above which no bank should charge. He mentioned a half and one per cent. I think the Irish banks have —one of them at any rate has—a lesser rate than the American ones. I do not think there is any intention of increasing it. There would be certain advantages in having a scale in the Act. It would mean it would not be necessary to specifically name rates in the will. At present if an individual appoints a bank as executor he does not name any scale in the will, and no fees can be paid. It would be a matter for a bank to decide whether it would act or not. Presumably it might not, but if you put scales into the Bill and you appoint a bank as executor then those scales will apply unless other scales have been previously arranged. It is a question as to whether scales should be put into the Bill. If it is so desired I would not oppose it. As I have pointed out, what the Bill does is it puts the corporate body in the same position as an individual. Frequently people do not act as executors unless they are left something, but if they are not left something and do act they cannot obtain anything for acting, and as the Bill stands if the corporate body is not left something in the will it cannot obtain anything for acting. As to putting in a certain scale of charges that is a matter that might be considered. With regard to Senator Brady's proposal I would not oppose that.

Question—"That the Bill be read a Second Time"—put and agreed to.
Ordered: That the Bill be referred to a Select Committee consisting of Senators Douglas, Brown, Bennett, Brady and Dowdall, three to form a quorum, and Senator Brady to be Chairman.

CATHAOIRLEACH

Senator Brady said it is a rule with the banks that where they have appointed executors they appoint outside solicitors. Does that also apply to the other corporate bodies?

That is the custom with the banks. I cannot speak for other bodies. It is a matter to be considered in Committee. The banks would be quite agreeable to any arrangement of the kind, with this proviso: that we do not want, possibly in the case of a poorer estate where there was nothing involved, to be forced against the wish of the persons interested to appoint someone else. That would rarely occur, so far as the banks are concerned.

When this matter goes into Committee there will be little difficulty in coming to an arrangement as regards the banks.

CATHAOIRLEACH

But you will have to deal with other corporate bodies as well.

There is an amendment which will raise that point.

Barr
Roinn