Gilmer v Incorporated Law Society of Ireland
| Jurisdiction | Ireland |
| Judge | President of the High Court |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1989 |
| Neutral Citation | 1988 WJSC-HC 1126 |
| Court | High Court |
| Date | 01 January 1989 |
1988 WJSC-HC 1126
THE HIGH COURT
AND
AND
AND
Synopsis:
PROFESSIONS
Solicitors
Law School - Entrance examination - Pass standard - Incorporated Law Society - Powers of Education Committee - Examination results - Whether candidate entitled to be admitted to Law School - The applicant wished to be admitted to the Law School of the Incorporated Law Society and she took the Society's final examination (1st Part) in November, 1986, for that purpose - Prior to the examination, the applicant received a syllabus which stated:- "150 places in this Society's Law School are awarded annually on the basis of overall performance in the five subjects other than Criminal Law, although a satisfactory standard must be achieved in each subject, including Criminal Law, before any candidate will be awarded a place" - The examination subjects were Tort, Contract, Property, Constitutional Law and Company Law - In order to pass the examination the applicant was required to achieve 50 of the maximum of 100 marks for each subject - Her initial results for those subjects were 54, 46, 53, 45 and 53 respectively, which gave her a total of 251 marks - After her results had been re-checked, the first result was increased by 3 to 57 which gave her a total of 254 marks - The applicant was informed by the Education Committee of the respondent Society that she had failed the examination - The examination was completed by 319 candidates, of whom 135 were successful - Only 63 candidates passed with marks of 50 or more in every subject; in addition 5 candidates passed after their results had been re-checked and a further 67 candidates were deemed to have passed the examination as a result of the application of the respondent Society's compensation rules - None of those rules excluded the applicant from qualifying for application of the compensation procedure except a rule which stated that a candidate who achieved less than 50 marks in two subjects was only entitled to that procedure if he had achieved a total of 255 marks or more, and if he had not less than 45 in one of those two subjects - The applicant had only 254 marks - By ss. 40 and 73 of the Act of 1954 and articles 7 and 28 of the Regulations of 1975, the Education Committee of the respondent Society was empowered to prescribe the courses of study to be followed by apprentices, to set the standards to be attained at the respondent Society's examinations, to consider and adjudicate upon the reports of examiners, and to satisfy themselves of the proficiency of a candidate at any examination before declaring him to have passed that examination - On 1/4/76 the Education Committee had decided that 50 was to be the pass mark at the final examination (Part 1), and they re-affirmed that decision on 19/2/81 - The respondent Society had always interpreted that decision as requiring a successful candidate to achieve 50% of the maximum marks in each subject - The pass mark of 50 was not expressed by the Education Committee to apply to every subject nor did they specify a minimum pass mark for a subject, as they had done for the honours standards - Having obtained leave, the applicant applied for (a) an order of certiorari quashing the decision of the respondent Society to refuse her entry to the Society's law school, (b) an order directing that Society to adhere to its agreement with the applicant to award 150 places in its law school to candidates who sat the said examination, (c) a declaration that the compensation rules applied by the Education Committee of the respondent Society were unlawful and void and (d) a declaration that the balance of the 150 promised places be filled on the basis of the highest aggregate marks of the remaining unsuccessful candidates who sat the said examination - Held that the Education Committee of the respondent Society had decided, pursuant to the statutory powers so vested in them, that the pass mark for the said examination was 50 - Held that the applicant had satisfied all the requirements of the Education Committee for entry into the respondent's law school except the requirement that the applicant should obtain an aggregate of 255 marks - Held that, as that requirement meant that the said Committee was demanding an average pass mark of 51, the decision to impose that requirement was ~ultra vires~ the said Committee - Held that the decision to refuse the applicant entry to the respondent Society's law school should be quashed and that the court would declare the applicant entitled to admission to that school - Held that the respondent Society had not contracted with the applicant to admit 150 candidates to the Society's law school - Solicitors Act, 1954–1960 (Apprenticeship and Education) Regulations, 1975, articles 6, 7, 28 - Solicitors Act, 1954, ss. 40, 73 - (1987/131 JR - Hamilton P. - 31/8/87) 1989 ILRM 590
|Gilmer v. Incorporated Law Society of Ireland|
TRIBUNAL
Powers
Law school - Entrance examination - Pass standard - Law Society's education committee - Examination results - Adjudication - Exercise of statutory powers - ~See~ Professions, solicitor - (1987/131 JR - Hamilton P. - 31/8/87) 1989 ILRM 590
|Gilmer v. Incorporated Law Society of Ireland|
INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY
Education Committee
Powers - Law school - Entrance examination - Pass standard - Examination results - Adjudication - Exercise of statutory powers - ~See~ Professions, solicitor - (1987/131 JR - Hamilton P. - 31/8/87) 1989 ILRM 590
|Gilmer v. Incorporated Law Society of Ireland|
Judgment of the President of the High Courtdelivered the 31st day of August, 1987.
The Incorporated Law Society of Ireland named in the title hereof is hereinafter referred to as "The Law Society".
The appointed members of the Council of the Incorporated Law Society of Ireland named in the title hereof are hereinafterreferred to as "The Council".
The appointed members of the Education Committee of the Incorporated Law Society are hereinafter referred to as "The EducationCommittee".
On the 18th day of May 1987 Yvonne Gilmer, of Barnamire, Enniskerry, in the County of Wicklow (hereinafter referred to as "the Applicant") applied ex-parte in accordance with the provisions of Order 84 Rule 20 of the Rules of the Superior Courts to the High Court for leave to apply to the High Court by way of an application for Judicial Review for the following reliefs:-
(1) An Order of this Honourable Court quashing the decision of the first named Respondent (namely the Law Society) to refuse her entry to the Law School at Blackhall Place, Dublin 7, for the current academicyear.
(2) An Order directing "The Law Society" to adhere to its agreement with the Applicant to award 150 places in its Law School to candidates who sat the Final Examination - First Part in or around the month of November 1986.
(3) A declaration that the compensation rules applied by "The Education Committee" and adopted by "The Law Society" and "The Council" in respect of the Final Examination - First Part which took place in or around the month of November 1986 in so far as they operate to restrict the number of places in the "Law Society's" Law School at Blackhall Place, Dublin 7, below a figure of 150 for the academic year ending 1988 are unlawful, void (or voidable) and of no effect.
(4) A declaration that the 14 places or such figure of placesas falls below 150 required to be filled by the Society be filled on the basis of the highest aggregate marks of the remaining candidates who sat the said examinations or in such manner as this Honourable Court shalldirect.
The said application was grounded on the notice required by the said rules and the Affidavit of the Applicant sworn on the 15th day of May 1987 verifying same and the exhibits therein referred to. By Order made on the 18th day of May 1987 the Applicant was granted liberty apply for the said reliefs by way of application for Judicial Review on the grounds specified in the said Order and it was further directed that
(1) the said application be made by Origination Notice ofMotion.
(2) the Applicant do serve the said Notice of Motion together with a copy of the Statement and verifying Affidavit on the Director General of the Incorporated Law Society on behalf of the Respondents herein.
(3) in the event of the Respondents intending to oppose the application for Judicial Review, the said Respondents do file in the Central Office a Statement in accordance with the provisions of Order 84 Rule 22 (4) of the Rules of the Superior Courts 1986 and an Affidavit verifying any facts relied on in such Statement and the said Respondents be directed to serve a copy of such Statement and Affidavit on allparties.
On the 25th day of June 1987 the Statement of Grounds of Opposition was filed in the Central Office on behalf of the Respondents and on the 2nd day of July 1987 the Affidavit ofDonal Binchy sworn herein on the 1st...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
MacGabhann v Incorporated Law Society of Ireland
...IR 297 SOLICITORS ACTS 1954 & 1960 (APPRENTICESHIP & EDUCATION) REG 1975 SI 66/1975 REG 28(1) GILMER V INCORPORATED LAW SOCIETY & ORS 1989 ILRM 590 SOLICITORS ACTS 1954 & 1960 (APPRENTICESHIP & EDUCATION) REG 1975 SI 66/1975 REG 7 Synopsis: PROFESSIONS Solicitors Law school - Entrance exam......