Galway Corporation v Dease

JurisdictionIreland
Judgment Date06 March 1948
Date06 March 1948
CourtSupreme Court
Galway Corporation v. Dease.
In re s. 106 of the Poor Relief (Ireland) Act, 1838, and in re s. 60 of the Local Government Act, 1941, and in re certain freehold hereditaments known as Mutton Island, Galway Bay; THE CORPORATION OF GALWAY
Appellants
and
CHARLOTTE DEASE, Respondent (1)

Supreme Court.

Rating - Exemption - Hereditaments granted in fee simple subject to fee farm rent payable over and above all taxes, charges and assessments (save quit rent and crown rent) - Hereditaments used solely for purposes of a lighthouse - Respondent as owner of grantors' interest, assessed to poor rates on half rent - Whether exempted under Merchant Shipping Act, 1894 (57 & 58 Vict., c. 60), s. 731 - Poor Relief (Ir.) Act, 1838 (1 & 2 Vict., c. 56),ss. 63 and 106 - Poor Relief (Ir.) Act, 1849 (12 & 13 Vict., c. 104), s. 10 -Local Government Act, 1941 (No. 23 of 1941), s. 60, sub-s. 4.

By an indenture of fee farm grant, certain premises were granted to the Commissioners of Irish Lights in fee simple subject to the yearly fee farm rent of £55 7s. 81/2d. over and above "all taxes charges assessments and impositions whatsoever ordinary or extraordinary imposed or to be imposed by Act of Parliament or otherwise howsoever (quit rent and crown rent only excepted)." The premises, consisting of Mutton Island, Galway Bay, were occupied by the said Commissioners solely for the purposes of a lighthouse situate thereon, and received only very limited services from the Corporation of Galway. C.D. became entitled to the grantors' interest under the said fee farm grant, as to three-quarters, absolutely, and as to one-quarter, as tenant for life, and the said Corporation, by several rates made under s. 61 of the Poor Relief (Ir.) Act, 1838, and duly amended under s. 60 of the Local Government Act, 1941, charged her with a sum of £266 19s. 3d., rates and arrears, in respect of half of the said rent: C.D. thereupon obtained an order of the Circuit Court Judge declaring that her interest in the said hereditaments was exempt, by virtue of the provisions of s. 731 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, from payment of all public, parochial and local taxes, duties and rates of every kind. Upon an appeal to the High Court on Circuit on behalf of the said Corporation against the said order, Murnaghan J. stated a Case for the opinion of the Supreme Court.

Held by the Supreme Court that the interest of C.D. under the said indenture of fee farm grant was exempt under s. 731 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, from all such taxes, duties and rates and that she was, therefore, entitled to have the amendment made in the said rates set aside.

Question of Law arising on the hearing of an appeal to the High Court on Circuit from the Circuit Court, referred to the Supreme Court by way of Case Stated, pursuant to s. 38, sub-s. 3, of the Courts of Justice Act, 1936, by Murnaghan J., sitting as a Judge of the High Court on Circuit. The Case Stated was as follows:—

"1. This matter came before me on appeal by the Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of the Borough of Galway (hereinafter called 'the appellants') from an order of the Circuit Court Judge for the County of Galway, dated the 19th February, 1946, declaring that the interest of Charlotte

Dease (hereinafter called 'the respondent') in the hereditaments described in the title hereof was exempt, by virtue of s. 731 of the statute, 57 & 58 Vict., c. 60, from payment of all public, parochial and local taxes, duties and rates of every kind, and further ordering that the appellants should pay to the respondent the costs of the hearing, measured at fifteen guineas and expenses, measured at five pounds.

2. On the hearing of the appeal in Galway on the 21st March, 1946, and at the request of the appellants, I agreed to state this Case pursuant to s. 38, sub-s. 3, of the Courts of Justice Act, 1936 (No. 48 of 1936), and I have postponed judgment pending the determination of the Supreme Court on this Case Stated. Mr. Leonard K.C. on behalf of the appellants agreed that his clients would pay all the respondent's costs of the Case Stated (limited to one senior counsel) in any event.

3. I incorporate in this Case the notice of appeal by which these proceedings were initiated by the respondent in the Circuit Court, the order of the Circuit Court Judge, the notice of appeal to the High Court on Circuit, and also the documents and correspondence set out in the schedule to this Case.

4. The respondent brought proceedings in the Circuit Court of Justice for the County of Galway by way of appeal (pursuant to s. 106 of the Poor Relief (Ir.) Act, 1838) against the sum of £266 19s. 3d., charged by several rates considered to have been made on her on the 28th March, 1945, under the provisions of s. 60 of the Local Government Act, 1941, in respect of her receipt of rent payable out of the hereditaments described in the title hereof. Said s. 60 authorises a local authority to amend certain rates made by them, and sub-s. 4 gives to any party aggrieved the same right of appeal as he would have had upon the making of the rates if those rates had comprised such amendment.

5. The premises to which the appeal relates are situate within the urban district area of Galway, which district is administered by the appellants. By the Local Government (Galway) Act, 1937 (No. 3 (Private) of 1937) the urban district of Galway became a municipal borough, its urban district council was dissolved and the inhabitants were incorporated as one body politic and corporate by the name of the Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of the Borough of Galway, and the borough was made an urban district and urban sanitary district.

6. By an indenture of fee farm grant, dated the 16th August, 1918, and made between Sir Thomas Grattan Esmonde, Mary Dease, the respondent, and the Most Reverend Joseph Hoare of the one part, and the Commissioners of Irish Lights of the other part, the premises named in the title hereof were granted unto the Commissioners of Irish Lights in fee simple subject to the yearly fee farm rent of £55 7s. 81/2d., clear rent over and above all taxes charges assessments and impositions whatsoever ordinary or extraordinary imposed, or to be imposed, by Act of Parliament or otherwise howsoever (quit rent and crown rent only excepted).

7. The premises in question are Mutton Island, which is an island in Galway Bay, stated to be about one mile from the shore. The island is solely occupied for the purposes of a lighthouse by the Commissioners of Irish Lights and the public services which it receives from the Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of the Borough of Galway and from the county Council of the County of Galway are very limited.

8. On behalf of the appellants it was contended by Mr. Leonard K.C. (with whom was Mr. T. J. Conolly) that the exemption from rates under s. 731 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, extends only to the premises occupied by the said Commissioners and that, by virtue of s. 63 of the Poor Relief (Ir.) Act, 1838, s. 10 of the Poor Relief (Ir.) Act, 1849, and s. 52 of the Local Government (Ir.) Act 1898, the respondent was liable to pay rates upon one half of the rent reserved by the said fee farm grant on the grounds that, within the meaning of s. 10 of the Poor Relief (Ir.) Act, 1849, she was a person receiving rent in respect of a hereditament exempt from rating under 1 & 2 Vict. c. 56, and was therefore liable to be rated in respect of such rent to the extent of one half the poundage of every rate made in and for the electoral division in which the said hereditaments should be situated.

9. On behalf of the respondent it was contended by Mr. Carson K.C. (with whom was Mr. Micks) that the premises were exempt from the payment of all public, parochial and local taxes, duties and rates of every kind by virtue of s. 731 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894.

10. It was proved that the respondent was entitled to the grantors' interest under the said fee farm grant, as to three-fourths, absolutely, and as to the remaining one-fourth, as tenant for life thereof.

11. At the hearing the claim of the appellants was limited to rates in respect of the financial years ending 31st March, 1944, and the 31st March, 1945; in respect of the year ending 31st March, 1944, town rates, £18 15s. 7d., poor rate, £20 7s. 10d., total, £39 3s. 5d.; in respect of the year ending, 31st March, 1945, town rates, £16 14s. 1d., poor rate, £23 5s. 5d., total £39 19s. 6d.. The appellants admit that no liability exists in respect of water-rate leviable under s. 52 of the statute. 26 & 27 Vict. (Local and Personal) c. 162.

12. The sole question of law for the determination of this Honourable Court is as to whether the interest of the respondent under the said indenture of fee farm grant is exempt from payment of all public, parochial and local taxes, duties and rates of every kind by virtue of s. 731 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894, and whether she is, accordingly, entitled to have the amendment made in the said rates for the years, 1944 and 1945, set aside."

The Case Stated was signed by the said Judge and was dated the 16th October, 1946.

Cur. adv. vult.

Maguire C.J....

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Harris and Others v Minister for Finance
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 24 June 1966
    ...4 I. C. L. R. 191. (3) [1928] I. R. 635. (4) [1894] 2 I. R. 49. (5) 16 I. C. L. R. 318. (6) 16 L. R. Ir. 381. (7) 32 L. R. Ir. 216. (8) [1948] I. R. 203. (1) 1 De. G. F. & J. 326. (2) 12 I. L. T. R. 139. (3) 31 L. R. Ir. 364. (4) 16 I. C. L. R. 318. (5) 12 L. R. Ir. 35. (6) [1928] I. R. 635......
  • Cork County Council and Another v Garde
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 17 May 1963
    ...Circuit Court Judge. (1) 8 I. L. R. 412. (2) 13 I. L. R. 438. (3) [1898] 2 I. R. 656. (4) 11 H. L. Cas. 656. (5) [1945] I. R. 561. (6) [1948] I. R. 203. (1) [1898] 2 I. R. 656, at p. (2) [1948] I. R. 203. (3) 2 Ir. C. L. R. 213. (4) 16 L. R. Ir. 381. (5) Ir. C. L. R. 217. (1) [1919] 2 I. R.......
  • Representative Church Body v Dublin Board of Assistance and Others
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 1 January 1949
    ...12 I. L. T. R. 139. (6) 12 L. R. Ir. 35. (7) [1894] 2 I. R. 49. (8) [1928] I. R. 635. (9) 63 I. L. T. R. 165. (10) [1945] I. R. 55 (11) [1948] I. R. 203. (1) 4 I. C. L. R. (2) [1894] 2 I. R. 49. (3) [1928] I. R. 635. ...

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