Frances Fitzgerald (Dublin Mid West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 82e:

In page 108, line 20, to delete “at the Bar”.

The purpose of amendments Nos. 82eand 82fis the straightforward matter of my concern that the phrase "at the Bar" might imply that a lawyer, in order to gain the title of senior counsel, must already be, or must at some time become, a member of the Law Library. Deputies will be aware that from the time of the inception of the Bill the Government's intention has been to broaden the practice options available to qualified barristers alongside the traditional model of the Law Library. As a result, it is the intention of these amendments to make it clear, in the context of a solicitor or barrister gaining a patent of precedence - that is, the title of senior counsel - that the solicitor or barrister concerned will not necessarily have to be operating within the Bar Council or Law Library model.

Amendment No. 82gis a technical amendment to a cross-reference to facilitate amendment No. 82j. Amendment No. 82hrepresents the deletion of section 139(8) and is purely a tidying-up exercise in drafting terms. As it stands, subsection (8) rather awkwardly provides that the committee charged with considering applications for the granting of the title of senior counsel shall not recommend the granting of that title to one of its own members. It makes this prohibition subject to subsection (9), which in turn allows the committee to recommend the granting of the patent as long as such a member is not involved in the deliberations. It is therefore considered more straightforward to delete subsection (8) and let subsection (9) speak for itself in avoiding any conflicts of interest that might arise.

Amendment No. 82ireflects the desired policy position that while a capacity for advocacy, more typically exercised by a barrister, shall be a relevant criterion in the consideration of whether a person should be granted a patent of precedence, a capacity for specialist litigation or a specialist knowledge of an area of law shall be an equally valid alternative. The purpose of the amendment is to enhance the scope of what it is to be senior counsel and to move away from a more narrow consideration of the proficiencies concerned, which could rule out eligible candidates.

It has come to my attention that there are some experienced senior counsel who are switching to the solicitors' profession in order to be allowed to practise as employees of legal firms, something that is currently prohibited for barristers but is to be opened up under the Bill. It would be regrettable if such practitioners, even temporarily, lost the title of senior counsel and then had to go through the process of reapplying for the title under the Bill's patents of precedence process in Part 12. Therefore, amendment No. 82jseeks to allow someone who has already gained the title of senior counsel while they were practising as a barrister to hold on to the title if they switch to practising as a solicitor. It should be noted that there is no need to insert an equivalent provision for solicitors who switch to being barristers, because the title of senior counsel is not yet available to solicitors. This is something that section 137 of this Bill will rectify.

See this speech in context