Attorney General v Southern Industrial Trust Ltd and Another

JurisdictionIreland
CourtSupreme Court
Judgment Date01 January 1960
Date01 January 1960
(S.C.)
Attorney-General
and
Southern Industrial Trust Limited and Another

Car subject to hire-purchase agreement - Car exported by owner - No licence for exportation - Balance of hire-purchase price due to hire-purchase company - Car the property of hire-purchase company - Proceedings by Attorney General upon information for condemnation of car - Whether proceedings criminal or civil -Customs (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1945, s. 5 (1).

  1. S. purchased a motor car at the end of 1950. The transaction was financed by I. T. Ltd. a hire-purchase company, the amount advanced to S. being repayable by him by monthly instalments. Wishing to export it temporarily he joined the A.A. and obtained a Tripty que for exportation of the car to Great Britain via Northern Ireland, and duly exported the car to Great Britain via Northern Ireland. In his application for membership of the A.A. S. gave an Eire address as his private and business address. In his application for the Tripty que he gave the same address as his permanent home address. He also declared that he had no domicile in Great Britain or Northern Ireland, that he was resident in Eire and that he had been so resident for the past half-year. In fact S. had spent only a period of ten days or a fortnight in the address he had given in Eire. He ceased paying the hire-purchase instalments when he still owed the company £46 18s. 3d. The car was, on the advice of the A.A., brought back to Eire where it was seized by a Customs Officer on the grounds that he suspected that it had been unlawfully exported from Eire in the first instance. At this time the Company were the owners of the car. The Company claimed the return of the car and the Attorney General brought proceedings by way of information for the forfeiture and...

To continue reading

Request your trial
48 cases
  • Murphy v The Revenue Commissioners
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 12 May 2016
    ......another was something for which he did not accept any ... Counsel for the applicants accepts the general principle that excludes judicial review where a ... Revenue Commissioners, Ireland and the Attorney General [2008] IEHC 397 , in that regard. ...v. Southern Industrial Trust Limited & Simons [1957] ......
  • Criminal Assets Bureau v Murphy
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 27 February 2018
    ...the admissibility of hearsay evidence. However, the Court had previously determined in Attorney General v. Southern Industrial Trust (1957) 94 I.L.T.R. 161 that forfeiture proceedings, in which no person was being made amenable for a criminal offence, were not criminal. Provided the condit......
  • Madigan v Attorney General
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 20 December 1983
    ...CO COUNCIL 1983 ILRM 449 MULLOY V MIN FOR EDUCATION 1975 IR 88 BLAKE V AG 1982 IR 117 1981 ILRM 34 AG V SOUTHERN INDUSTRIAL TRUST LTD 94 ILTR 161 ART 26 & OFFENCES AGAINST THE STATE (AMDT) BILL 1940, IN RE 1940 IR 470 CITYVIEW V ANCO 1980 IR 381 PIGS MARKETING BOARD V DONNELLY 1939 IR 413 F......
  • Iarnnód Éireann v Ireland
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 28 April 1995
    ...& MOORE V AG 1983 IR 339 CHESTVALE PROPERTIES LTD V GLACKIN 1993 3 IR 35 CAHILL V SUTTON 1980 IR 269 AG V SOUTHERN INDUSTRIAL TRUST LTD 94 ILTR 161 BLAKE V AG 1982 IR 117 1981 ILRM 34 CONSTITUTION ART 40.3.2 CONSTITUTION ART 40.1 SPUC V GROGAN 1989 IR 753 AG FOR ENGLAND & WALES V BRANDO......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • Using Civil Processes in Pursuit of Criminal Law Objectives: A Case Study of Non-Conviction-Based Asset Forfeiture
    • United Kingdom
    • International Journal of Evidence & Proof, The Nbr. 16-4, October 2012
    • 1 October 2012
    ...(No. 1) (1979–80) 1 EHRR 647.54 372 US 144 (1963).55 Campbell, ‘Theorising Asset Forfeiture in Ireland’, above n. 16 at 448.56 [1960] 94 ILTR 161.57 [1988] IR 326. 348 THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EVIDENCE & PROOF USING CIVIL PROCESSES IN PURSUIT OF CRIMINAL LAW OBJECTIVES demonstrate that ......
  • The proportionality test: present problems
    • Ireland
    • Irish Judicial Studies Journal Nbr. 1-8, January 2008
    • 1 January 2008
    ...I.R. 501; Buckley v. The Attorney General [1950] I.R. 67; O’Donovan v. The Attorney General [1961] I.R. 114. 4[1939] I.R. 413. 5 (1964) 94 I.L.T.R. 161. 6 [1940] I.R. 470. The Canadian test from which Heaney was derived was set out in R v. Oakes [1986] 1 S.C.R. 103. 7[1994] 3 I.R. 593. 2008......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT