OVER 800 law undergraduates hoping to graduate and become solicitors yesterday lost their High Coup challenge to a recent change in the Law Society's regulations which requires them to sit the entrance examination.
However, Mr Justice McCracken declared that the society should consider modifying the regulations so applicants would be granted exemptions from having the sit the exam.
He made a declaration that the students' position constituted "exceptional circumstances" which, under the society's Regulation 30, allowed certain exemptions and that the society, through its education committee, should consider modifying its regulations.
Notwithstanding the very considerable sympathy he had for the applicants, he could not grant any mandatory order against the society as its regulation allowing these exemptions - Regulation 15 - had been declared invalid in another High Court case.
It would not, therefore, be lawful for him to direct the society to consider granting exemptions to the applicants on the basis that Regulation 15 still applied.
Ms Mary Finlay SC, for the Law Society, said it would consider the position of graduates at a meeting of the education committee on July 26th. It would deal with the remainder in the autumn.
The applicants are all law students in the Republic who are pursuing courses for undergraduate law degrees in UCC, UCD, TCD, UCG and UL. Previously the Law Society regulations waived the need for law graduates of the five universities to take the entrance exam.
The change followed a case taken last year by law graduates from Queen's University, Belfast, who had to take the entrance exam and claimed discrimination. The High Court ruled that Regulation 15 concerning this was invalid and this was upheld by the Supreme Court.
Mr Justice McCracken, giving his judgment, said following the Queen's University decision, the Law Society was placed in a very difficult position. It made a decision in December, 1995, that it would not seek to introduce any system of exemptions.
The applicants had argued that they had a legitimate expectation they would not have to take the exam. It was undeniable that representations were made to them at the start of their third level studies that certain exemptions would be given by the society to graduates who fulfilled certain conditions. It would be reasonable to imply that the regulations would remain for long enough for them to be taken advantage of by first year students.
"Unfortunately, this does not end the matter and, indeed, this case is unique in that it has now been held that the regulation, which they had a legitimate expectation would inure for their benefit, is in fact invalid and was ultra vires (outside) the powers of the society.
"It would not, therefore, be lawful for me to direct the society to consider granting exemptions to the applicants on the basis that Regulation 15 still applies. I cannot, therefore, give substantive relief to the applicants on this basis."
Another regulation, Regulation 30, allowed the society to grant exemptions in "exceptional circumstances".
The circumstances in which the applicants found themselves were just as exceptional as the circumstances in which the persons referred to in the Queen's decision found themselves and the applicants' case was far stronger.
He would, therefore, make a declaration that the position of the students in this case constituted an exceptional circumstance within the meaning of Regulation 30. He would further direct the society to consider modifying the requirements of the regulations so as to ensure that the applicants would be granted the exemptions.
