Meath County Council v Daly

JurisdictionIreland
JudgeEgan, J.
Judgment Date01 January 1988
Neutral Citation1987 WJSC-HC 1975
Docket Number61 MCA 1986,[1986 No. 61 MCA]
CourtHigh Court
Date01 January 1988

1987 WJSC-HC 1975

THE HIGH COURT

61 MCA 1986
MEATH CO COUNCIL v. MARTIN DALY MOTORS
IN THE MATTER OF SECTION 27 OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT(PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT) ACT, 1976

AND

IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY THE COUNTY COUNCIL OFTHE COUNTY OF MEATH

BETWEEN:

THE COUNTY COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF MEATH
APPLICANT

AND

MARTIN DALY TRADING AS MARTIN DALY MOTORS
FIRST-NAMED RESPONDENTS

AND

STREMMA LIMITED TRADING AS FAIRYHOUSE TYRES (IN SUBSTITUTIONFOR RICHARD BERWICK HITHERTO NAMED AS RESPONDENT)
SECOND-NAMED RESPONDENTS

Citations:

LOCAL GOVT (PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT) ACT 1976 S27

KELLY V IRELAND & AG 1986 ILRM 318

PIONEER AGGREGATES (UK) LTD V SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT 1985 AC 132

DUBLIN CO COUNCIL V TALLAGHT BLOCK CO LTD 1982 ILRM 534

HARTLEY V MIN FOR HOUSING & LOCAL GOVT 1970 1 QBD 413

Synopsis:

EVIDENCE

Estoppel

Issue estoppel - Res judicata - Crime - Trial - Acquittal - Summary trial in District Court - The respondent was tried on a complaint charging him with having carried on a development contrary to s.24 of the Act of 1963 - The complaint was dismissed by the District Justice, but he did not state the reasons for the dismissal - Subsequently the applicants applied, pursuant to s.27 of the Act of 1976, to the High Court for an order prohibiting the respondent from continuing his alleged unauthorised use of a certain structure - Held that the applicants were not estopped by the dismissal of the complaint from making their application since it did not appear that, in dismissing the complaint, the District Justice had decided that the respondent had not made a material change in the use of the structure - ~See~ Planning, use - Local Government (Planning & Development) Act, 1963, ss.3, 24 - Local Government (Planning & Development) Act, 1976, s.27 - (1986/61 MCA - Egan J. - 2/6/87) [1987] IR 391 [1988] ILRM 274

|Meath County Council v. Daly|

PLANNING

Use

Appointed day - Continuance - Discontinuance - Resumption - Unauthorised use - Estoppel - Intermittent extraneous uses by different occupiers after appointed day (1/10/64) and before resumption of original use by present occupier - Under s.24 of the Act of 1963 the permission of a planning authority is required in respect of development of land which was not commenced before the appointed day, and the word "development" is defined by s.3 as including the making of any material change in the use of any structure - The occupier of certain land erected a structure and some petrol pumps thereon before the appointed day; he used the structure and the land for repairing cars and the sale of petrol - That use was continued by successive occupiers from before the appointed day until 1969; from that date a company carried on another business on the land until 1975 - Thereafter the structure was either unused or was used for the sale of cars and machinery, or as a garage, until August, 1983, when the structure was used for the sale of carpets until February, 1985 - The respondent occupier started to use the structure as a garage from that date and continued that use thereafter without permission - On 3/9/85 the respondent was tried in the District Court at the hearing of a complaint that, on 17/4/85 and subsequently, he carried on a development contrary to s.24 of the Act, as amended - On 21/10/85 the District Justice dismissed the complaint without stating the reasons for his decision - In 1986 the applicant planning authority applied to the High Court pursuant to s.27 of the Act of 1976 for an order prohibiting the respondent from continuing his alleged unauthorised use of the structure - The applicants conceded that the respondent's current use of the structure was similar to the use of the structure immediately before the appointed day - Held that the applicants were not estopped by the dismissal of the complaint from making their application since it did not appear that, in dismissing the complaint, the District Justice had decided that the respondent had not made a material change in the use of the structure - ~Kelly v. Ireland~ [1986] ILRM 318 considered - Held that the respondent's use of the structure was an unauthorised use notwithstanding the fact that the respondent's use was similar to the use of the structure immediately before the appointed day - Local Government (Planning & Development) Act, 1963, ss.3, 24 - Local Government (Planning & Development) Act, 1976, s.27 - (1986/61 MCA - Egan J. - 2/6/87) [1988] ILRM 274

|Meath County Council v. Daly|

WORDS AND PHRASES

"Unauthorised use"

Structure - Use - Appointed day - Continuance - Discontinuance - Resumption - Current use of structure unauthorised notwithstanding that it was similar to the use of the structure immediately before the appointed day - ~See~ Planning, use - (1986/61 MCA - Egan J. - 2/6/87) [1987] IR 391 [1988] ILRM 274

|Meath County Council v. Daly|

1

The premises in question are situate at Blackbush, Dunshaughlin in the County of Meath. Prior to the "appointed day" (i.e. 1st October 1964) one Alfred O'Toole erected a structure on the site which he used for car repairs. Healso erected petrol pumps and petrol was sold from the premises. This occurred sometime in the late 1950's.

2

In or about 1965 the premises were occupied by Boyne Motors Ltd. and were used for similar purposes.

3

In or about the year 1969 Boyne Motors Ltd. disposed of the property which then became owned by windowseal Double Clazing Ltd. until about 1975. Windowseal Double Glazing Ltd. carried on their own business (which was not a garage business) during the early years of their ownership but at a later stage the premises appear to have been in the occupation of a Mr. Bill Morgan as caretaker for the Windowseal Company and I am satisfied that there was work done on the premises in the nature of repair jobs on motor vehicles and the spraying of motor vehicles. Mr. James Browne assisted in this work. In 1973 one Basil Curran used the premises for the sale and repair of farm machinery...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Molloy v Minister for Justice
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 30 April 2004
    ...and Local Government [1970] 1 Q.B. 413; [1970] 2 W.L.R. 1; [1969] 3 All E.R. 1658; (1969) 68 L.G.R. 32. Meath County Council v. Daly [1987] I.R. 391; [1988] I.L.R.M. 274. Newbury District Council v. Secretary of State for the Environment [1981] A.C. 578; [1980] 2 W.L.R. 279; [1980] 1 All E.......
  • RE National Irish Bank Ltd (No 2)
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 19 March 1999
    ...[1991] 1 I.R. 69. Maxwell v. Dept. of Trade [1974] Q.B. 523; [1974] 2 W.L.R. 338; [1974] 2 All E.R. 122. Meath County Council v. Daly [1987] I.R. 391; [1988] I.L.R.M. 274. Mooney v. An Post [1994] E.L.R. 103; (S.C.) [1998] 4 I.R. 288. Murray v. Fitzpatrick (1914) 48 I.L.T. 305. O'Donnell v.......
  • Westmeath County Council v Quirke & Sons
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 23 May 1996
    ...have concluded that the quarrying and the limestone production had been abandoned? 190 In Meath County Council -v- Martin Daly, 1988 I.L.R.M. 274, Egan J. was dealing with a case under Section 27 of the 1976 Act in which the Respondent was maintaining that permission was not required for de......
  • Re National Irish Bank Ltd, (Under Investigation)
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 19 March 1999
    ...ELR 103 MURRAY V FITZPATRICK 1914 48 ILTR 305 DONNELLY V INGRAM 1897 31 ILTR 139 O'DONNELL V HEGARTY 1941 IR 538 MEATH CO COUNCIL V DALY 1987 IR 391 ATHLONE WOOLLEN MILLS V ATHLONE UDC 1950 IR 1 MAXWELL V DEPT OF TRADE & INDUSTRY 1974 2 AER 122 HAUGHEY, IN RE 1971 IR 217 CHESTVALE PROPERTIE......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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