Ganley and Others v Minister for Agriculture
| Jurisdiction | Ireland |
| Court | High Court |
| Judgment Date | 13 March 1950 |
| Date | 13 March 1950 |
Fisheries Acts - Practice - Appeal against bye-low - Extension of time for appeal - Jurisdiction of the High Court - Fisheries Act 1925 (No. 32 of1925), s. 28, sub-ss. 4 and 5 - Courts of Justice Act, 1936 (No. 48 of 1936),s. 10 - Fisheries Act, 1939 (No. 17 of 1939). s. 35.
The limitation of time within which a person aggrieved by a bye-law made by the Minister, under the Fisheries Acts, may appeal to the High Court, under s. 28, sub-s. 4, of the Fisheries Act, 1925, is a statutory limitation, and the High Court has no jurisdiction to extend the time so limited.
So held by Kingsmill Moore J.
Summary Summons.
The Minister for Agriculture, by virtue of the powers conferred upon him by s. 35, sub-s. 3, of the Fisheries Act, 1939, made a bye-law, which was dated the 12th August, 1949, and which was duly published in Iris Ofigiúil on the 19th August, 1949. The applicants, alleging that they were persons aggrieved by the bye-law, issued an originating summons, on the 12th October, 1949, seeking an order that the bye-law be annulled.
At the hearing before Kingsmill Moore J. the applicants applied for an order extending the time for appeal, which is limited by s. 28, sub-s. 4, of the Fisheries Act, 1925, to one fortnight from the publication of the bye-law in Iris Ofigiúil.
Kingsmill Moore J.:—
The time within which an appeal against a bye-law made pursuant to the Fisheries Act, 1925, may be brought, is limited to a fortnight from the publication of the bye-law in Iris Ofigiúil by the provisions of s. 28, sub-s. 4, of the said Act. This is a statutory time limit, and in my opinion, I have no power to extend it, notwithstanding that the appeal is now brought by summons before a High Court Judge in place of the tribunal provided for by the Act.
It has been urged upon me that s. 10 of the Courts of Justice Act, 1936, which brought about, this change in procedure, had the effect of conferring upon this Court jurisdiction to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cork County Council v Whillock
...S8 MALICIOUS INJURIES ACT 1981 S14(3) STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS 1957 S49(1) INTERPRETATIN ACT 1937 S11 GANLEY & ORS V MIN FOR AGRICULTURE 1950 IR 191 SMITH V DUBLIN CO COUNCIL 35 ILTR 110 LOCAL GOVT (IRL) ACT 1898 S5(7) GRAND JURY ACT 1836 S137 DAMAGE TO PROPERTY (COMPENSATION) ACT 1923 S21 D......
-
Irish Refining Plc v Commissioner of Valuation
...STATE V PHEASANTRY LTD UNREP HIGH 11.05.87 COMMISSIONER OF VALUATION, STATE V O'MALLEY UNREP MCWILLIAM 1984/4/1115 GANLY V MIN AGRICULTURE 1950 IR 191 BENNION STATUTORY INTERPRETATION M'KEONE, ap., BRADFORD 7 IJ (NS) 157 GAUSSEN V LOWER BANN 1929 NI 11 MONTREAL STREET RAILWAY 1917 AC 170......
-
Gammell v Dublin County Council
....v. Ryan 1979 I.R. 295 The State (Muldowney) .v. E.J. Kelleher (Costello, J., 5th February1982) Ganley .v. The Minister for Agriculture 1950 I.R. 191 Counsel for the Plaintiff: Hugh O'Flaherty, S.C. and Anthony Counsel for the Defendant: T.C. Smyth, S.C., and James Mackay 1 Judgment of Miss......
-
VA02.1.034 – Cork City Council
...the Notice Party we were referred to the section of the Valuation Act, 1988. We were also referred to Ganley v Minister for Agriculture (1950) I.R. 191. In the course of his judgment in this short case Kingsmill Moore made it clear that a statutory time limit is not capable of being extende......