Solicitor quits over Law Society backing Yes with no consultation
A ROW in the Law Society has seen a solicitor resigning from its family and child committee, saying the body’s call for a Yes vote this Friday is ‘misleading for voters’.
Gareth Noble, a member of the Law Society’s Family and Child law subcommittee, has resigned his subcomittee position over ‘a lack of consultation’ with members of the representative body on public support for a Yes/Yes vote in the referendums.
The Council of the Law Society announced last Saturday it endorses a Yes/Yes vote to pass both the referendums on family and care on Friday. Mr Noble, a child and family law solicitor and partner with KOD Lyons, said: ‘It gives a very misleading impression to voters, that the
‘I find it really inappropriate’
Law Society has taken a position on two complex referendums without adequate consultation with its own wider membership.
‘The idea that the Law Society would take a formal position on behalf of its 10,000 members without adequate consultation, I just find really inappropriate.’
He also said that it was never clear that the Law Society was going to take a formal stance on the referendums and advocate for a position.
‘The rushed pronouncements of the Law Society without adequate consultations with its members is a matter of huge regret, and in that context I could not serve on that committee.’
Mr Noble said that while some members of the child and family law committee had made a submission to the Law Society Council taking a view on the referendum, it was never approved widely by the committee. There are around 20 members of the Family and Child law committee in the Law Society. The Council of the Law Society of Ireland, which comprises 31 elected members, decided on the position of the representative body.
‘My action is to demonstrate that there are different views within the legal profession as to the impact of what these referendums propose. I’m by no means a lone wolf.’
The solicitor said a large majority of his work is representing family carers, and he is voting No to the question of replacing the provision for a mother’s care in the home, with recognition for care given within families.
He is voting Yes to expand the definition of family, to those not based on marriage but those based on ‘other durable relationships’. He explained: ‘From a legal perspective the care referendum doesn’t create a single enforcable right for carers, so it’s on that basis I am voting no.’
The Mail understands that a smaller group of the Child and Family law subcommittee made a submission of an ‘opinion paper’ to the Council on the matter, but it was not discussed or approved by the subcommittee.
On publicising the Law
Society’s support for the Yes Yes vote, President of the Law Society Barry MacCarthy said that the body had ‘considered the issues involved’ and would be advocating for a Yes vote in both referendums. A spokeswoman for the Law Society said: ‘The decisions of the Law Society Council are made in accordance with byelaws passed by the members through the annual general meeting of the Law Society.’
Law Society member and workplace law solicitor Barry Crushell said that the position adopted by the Law Society ‘came as a shock to many of its members given that there was no information or consultation process prior to the Law Society issuing a press release advocating a Yes Yes vote.’
He said: ‘There are divergent views on whether the constitutional amendments that are currently being proposed, are fit for purpose.’
He also said many solicitors are taking a ‘very cautious approach’ to the proposed changes. ‘The public perception may have been that the Law Society members unanimously came to a decision to support the proposed constitutional amendments but that would be inaccurate.’
‘It was a shock to many members’