Murphy v Corporation of Dublin
| Jurisdiction | Ireland |
| Court | Supreme Court |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1979 |
| Docket Number | [1976 No. 2342 P.] |
| Date | 01 January 1979 |
(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...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
4 cases
-
Harold v Jameson & Jameson & Future Print Ltd v Farrell and Others T/A Farrell Grant Sparks
...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 Judgment of the Hon. Mr Justice Aindrias Caoimh 1 delivered on 31st day of July, 2001. 2 This is a review of taxation bro......
-
Right Hon The Lord Mayor Aldermen & Burgesses of Dublin v Underwood
...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......
-
White v The Bar Council of Ireland
...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 ......
-
Portsmouth Arms Hotel Ltd v Enniscorthy Udc
...1954 S36(1) ARBITRATION ACT 1950 S22(1) UK MONTGOMERY, JONES & CO V LIEBENTHAL & CO 1898 78 LT 406 RSC O.56 r4 MURPHY V DUBLIN CORPORATION 1979 IR 115 MEENAGHAN V DUBLIN CO COUNCIL 1984 ILRM 616 KEENAN V SHIELD INSURANCE CO LTD 1988 IR 89 MCSTAY V ASSICURAZIONE GENERALI SPA 1989 IR 248 HOGA......
