Cox v Electricity Supply Board (No. 2)

CourtSupreme Court
Judgment Date01 January 1943
Docket Number(No. 2).
Date01 January 1943

Supreme Court.

(No. 2).
Cox v. Electricity Supply Board (No. 2).

Practice - Judgment "- Liberty to apply" - Amendment of statement of claim - Whether power to amend after judgment - Plaintiff seeking only declaratory relief in statement of claim - Declaration that purported dismissal of plaintiff from office was ultra vires, void and of no legal effect - Order granting declaration and giving liberty to apply - Application made subsequently to amend statement of claim so as to include a claim for salary and bonus - Whether plaintiff entitled to amendment under liberty to apply. - Rules of the Supreme Court (Ir. 1905), Or. XXVIII, r. 1.

Motion on Notice.

In an action brought by him against the Electricity Supply Board (reported ante p. 94) the plaintiff, Francis Arthur Cox, obtained an order from the High Court declaring that an order made by the Board on the 19th September, 1933, purporting to remove him from the service of the Board, was ultra vires, void, inoperative and of no legal effect. The order of the High Court also directed an enquiry as to damages suffered by the plaintiff by reason of the dismissal, and gave him liberty to apply.

On appeal by the Board to the Supreme Court the declaration in favour of the plaintiff (which was all he sought in his statement of claim) was affirmed, but so much of the order of the High Court as directed an enquiry was discharged by the Supreme Court.

Subsequently the plaintiff applied by notice of motion to Gavan Duffy J. for an enquiry as to what sum was due to him from the Board, in respect of salary and bonus, for the period from the date of the purported dismissal. On the hearing of that application Gavan Duffy J. gave the plaintiff liberty to serve an amended notice of motion to have his statement of claim amended.

By an amended notice of motion, dated the 18th December, 1941, the plaintiff applied to amend his statement of claim in the following respects:—

"By adding after paragraph 3 thereof the following paragraph:—

3a. At the date of the said dismissal the plaintiff was receiving and was entitled to salary at the rate of £281 5s. 0d. a year together with bonus thereon calculated according to the Cost of Living Index figure.

At all times since the date of said purported dismissal the plaintiff has been and remains ready and willing to discharge the duties of his office and employment. The defendants have not paid to the plaintiff any sum of money in respect of his salary or bonus since the 1st day of September, 1933, and there is now due and owing to the plaintiff from the defendants after making all just allowances, the sum of £2,836 12s. 1d. in respect of such salary and bonus from the 1st day of September, 1933, to the 13th day of February, 1941, as more specifically set out and calculated in the particulars as in paragraph 7 of the affidavit of plaintiff herewith furnished.

By adding to paragraph 4 thereof the following sub-paragraphs:—

(2) If necessary, an inquiry as to what sum is due by the defendants to the plaintiff in respect of salary and bonus from the 1st day...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • MAU v Minister for Justice
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 9 February 2011
    ...- Wildgust v Bank of Ireland [2001] 1 ILRM 24 and Stewart v Engel [2000] 1 WLR 2268 distinguished; Cox v Electricity Supply Board (No.2) [1943] IR 231 applied - Rules of the Superior Courts 1986 (SI 15/1986), O 28, r 1 - Amendment refused (2009/881JR - Hogan J 9/2/2011) [2011] IEHC 95 AU(M......
  • Devoy v Governor of Portlaoise Prison and Others
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 22 June 2009
    ...O'SIODHACHAIN v IRELAND UNREP SUPREME 12.02.2002 2002/23/5819 SHINE v MEDICAL COUNCIL UNREP SUPREME 14.7.2008 2008 IESC 41 COX v ESB (NO2) 1943 IR 231 WILDGUST v BANK OF IRELAND 2001 1 ILRM 24 2006 1 IR 570 O.84 r23(2) PRISON RULES SI 252/2007 ART 75(1) PRISON RULES SI 252/2007 ART 75 (7)......
  • SZ (Pakistan) v Minister for Justice & Law Reform and Others
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 1 March 2013
    ...1 IR 749 2011 IEHC 95 U (MA) v MIN FOR JUSTICE UNREP HOGAN 13.12.2010 2010 50 12672 2010 IEHC 492 COX v ELECTRICITY SUPPLY BOARD (NO 2) 1943 IR 231 1942 76 ILTR 122 MCINERNEY HOMES LTD, IN RE UNREP SUPREME 22.7.2011 2011 IESC 31 2011/512JR - Hogan - High - 1/3/2013 - 2013 55 15434 2013 IE......
  • M (P)(Botswana) v Min for Justice and Others (No.3)
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 14 June 2013
    ...2(1) EEC DIR 2005/85 ART 4(1) M (M) v MIN FOR JUSTICE & ORS (NO 3) UNREP HOGAN 23.1.2013 2013 IEHC 9 COX v ELECTRICITY SUPPLY BOARD (NO 2) 1943 IR 231 1942 76 ILTR 122 MCINERNEY HOMES LTD, IN RE UNREP SUPREME 22.7.2011 2011 IESC 31 Asylum & Immigration law- Judicial review- Subsidiary prot......

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