Michael McDowell (Dublin South East, Progressive Democrats)

As I explained on Committee Stage, I do not propose to accept this amendment. Introducing the words "or otherwise" without any definition of what "otherwise" might mean could render the section vague and uncertain. The provisions in section 33 which replaced the provisions of the Prescription Acts 1832 and 1858 are based on detailed Law Reform Commission recommendations set out in its report on easements and profits À prendre by prescription, which is Law Reform Commission report 66 of 2002. Section 33 clarifies and simplifies the existing law providing that legal title to an easement or profit by prescription may only be obtained by a claimant on the basis of a court order which is then registered in the Land Registry or the Registry of Deeds. Section 69 of the Registration of Title Act 1964 provides for the registration of easements or profits not created by express grant or reservation or by means of such a court order.

With reference to what Senator Cummins was saying about section 38, the disposition we are dealing with in subsection 38(2) would normally be done by way of deed. I do not think it is necessary, therefore, to make the proposed amendment No. 22.