Cane v Dublin Corporation; Cane v Liffey Syndicate Ltd
| Jurisdiction | Ireland |
| Court | Supreme Court (Irish Free State) |
| Judgment Date | 21 July 1927 |
| Docket Number | (1926. No. 3602.) |
| Date | 21 July 1927 |
H. C.,
S. C.,
Cane
and
Dublin Corporation
Cane
and
Liffey Syndicate, Ltd.
Procedure - Petition against Bill - Appointment of Joint Committee of the Senate and the Dáil - Validity of appointment - Whether evidence before Committee admissibleto vary Committee's report - Petitioner's costs - Taxing Officer's certificate - "Conclusive evidence" - Action to enforce payment - Award of costs without jurisdiction - Leave to defend action - Private Bills Costs Act, 1865 (28 Vict. c. 27), ss. 1, 3, 5 - Private Bills Costs Act,1924 (No. 52 of 1924), s. 5 - Constitution of the Irish Free State (Saorstát Eireann) Act, 1922 (No. 1 of 1922), Sch. I., Arts. 20, 22 -Standing Orders of the Dáil and the...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
9 cases
-
Callely v Moylan and Others
...Acts"), any and all complaints made thereunder are cognisable by the courts. 518 (vi) Cane v. The Right Honourable the Lord Mayor & Ors. [1927] I.R. 582; In re Haughey [1971] I.R. 217 (or "In re Haughey"); and McGuinness J. (p 626 in Maguire) where she recites an apparent concession by th......
-
Maguire v Ardagh
...PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF WITNESSES) ACT 1997 S9(b) RSC O.84 r26 RSC O.84 r20 HAUGHEY, RE 1971 IR 217 CANE V DUBLIN CORPORATION 1927 IR 582 CONSTITUTION ART 34.3 CONSTITUTION ART 13.8 CONSTITUTION ART 22.2.5 CONSTITUTION ART 15 CONSTITUTION ART 15.13 CONSTITUTION ART 15.12 CONSTITUTION......
-
Callely v Moylan and Others
...ACT 1995 S8(1) ETHICS IN PUBLIC OFFICE ACT 1995 S5(1) ETHICS IN PUBLIC OFFICE ACT 1995 S7(2) CONSTITUTION ART 40.1 CANE v DUBLIN CORP 1927 IR 582 CONSTITUTION ART 15.15 CONSTITUTION ART 17 CONSTITUTION ART 21 CONSTITUTION ART 22 CONSTITUTION ART 34 ETHICS IN PUBLIC OFFICE ACT 1995 S9 DOHER......
-
Maguire v Ardagh
...premise that a power of inquiry existed. They also cited the decision of the High Court and Supreme Court of Saorstat Éireann in Cane v Dublin Corporation [1927] IR 582, discussing the procedure by way of private bill in the Oireachtas, as demonstrating that the Oireachtas has an inherent ......
Get Started for Free