Murphy v Corporation of Dublin

JurisdictionIreland
Judgment Date01 January 1979
Date01 January 1979
Docket Number[1976 No. 2342 P.]
CourtSupreme Court
(S.C.)
Murphy
and
Corporation of Dublin

Interest - Housing authority - Possession of land taken before assessment of compensation - Rule of interest payable - Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845 (8 9 Vict., c. 18), s. 85 - Housing of the Working Classes Act, 1890 (53 54 Vict., c. 70), 2nd schedule, article 24 - Housing Act, 1966 (No. 21), s. 80.

Section 80, sub-s. 1, of the Act of 1966 states that where a housing authority is authorised, by a compulsory purchase order made and confirmed under that Act, to acquire land compulsorily for the purposes of the Act, the authority may (subject as therein) enter into possession of the land without the previous consent of the owner thereof and without compliance with the provisions of the Lands Clauses Acts relating to entry on lands, and the sub-section provides that, in that event, the authority shall be liable to pay (a) the like compensation as if the said provisions had been complied with and (b) interest upon such compensation as from the date of such entry. The sub-section does not specify the rate of interest which is applicable. The defendants, being a housing authority, entered into possession of the plaintiff's lands pursuant to s. 80, sub-s. 1, of the Act of 1966 at a time when the amount of the compensation payable to the plaintiff, being in dispute, had been referred to arbitration and the arbitrator had not made his award. After the award had been made and part of the compensation had been paid, the plaintiff claimed in the High Court payment of the balance of the compensation with interest thereon. At the trial of the action the main issue...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • White v Bar Council of Ireland
    • Ireland
    • Court of Appeal (Ireland)
    • 6 December 2016
    ...276. Madigan v. Attorney General [1986] I.L.R.M. 136. Meskell v. Córas Iompair Éireann [1973] I.R. 121. Murphy v. Corporation of Dublin [1979] I.R. 115. Murphy v. Stewart [1973] I.R. 97; (1973) 107 I.L.T.R. 117. Murtagh Properties v. Cleary [1972] I.R. 330. Nottinghamshire County Council v.......
  • Right Hon The Lord Mayor Aldermen & Burgesses of Dublin v Underwood
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 12 May 1993
    ...be unjust if the Claimant had no entitlement to such a reimbursement and he referred to Mr. Justice Griffin's Judgment in Joseph Murphy v. Dublin Corporation 1979 I.R. 115 at page 121:- “In my view, therefore, taking Section 80 of the Housing Act of 1966 as enacted, it would not be a reason......
  • Harold v Jameson & Jameson & Future Print Ltd v Farrell and Others T/A Farrell Grant Sparks
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 14 November 2003
    ...1 ILRM 34 TOBIN & TWOMEY SERVICES LTD V KERRY FOODS LTD 1999 1 ILRM 428 COURT & COURT OFFICERS ACT 1995 S27(3) MURPHY V DUBLIN CORPORATION 1979 IR 115 JAMESON V FARRELL Synopsis PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE Costs Taxation of costs - Legal profession - Whether rulings of taxing master unjust - Wh......
  • White v The Bar Council of Ireland
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 22 July 2016
    ...Mart Ltd. v. Attorney General [1970] I.R. 317 and, for example, the observations of Griffin J. in Murphy v. Corporation of Dublin [1979] I.R. 115, 121, accords with the Constitution, in particular the constitutional right to earn a livelihood, as considered below. Part 3 The Constitutional ......
  • 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