Murphy v GM PB PC Ltd and GH

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Mr Justice O'Higgins
• Judgment Date: 04 June 1999
• Neutral Citation: [1999] IEHC 5
• Court: High Court
• Date: 04 June 1999

[1999] IEHC 5

THE HIGH COURT

No. 9022P/1997

MURPHY v. GM PB PC LTD. & GH

BETWEEN

MICHAEL F. MURPHY

PLAINTIFF/APPLICANT

AND

GM PB PC LIMITED AND GH

DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS

Citations:

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1996 S3(1)

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1996 S2

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1996 S7

GILLIGAN V CRIMINAL ASSETS BUREAU (CAB) 1998 3 IR 185

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1996 S4

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1996 S3

RSC O.4 r1

RSC O.11 r1(g)

CAUDRON V AIR ZAIRE 1985 IR 716

LOCAL GOVT (PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT) ACT 1976 S27

LOCAL GOVT (PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT) ACT 1992 S19(4)(g)

SISKINA (CARGO OWNERS) V DISTOS SA 1979 AC 210

CHANNEL TUNNEL GROUP LTD V BALFORE BEATTY CONSTRUCTION LTD 1993 1 AER 664

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1996 S1(1)

RSC O.124 r3

SAVVINOS, IN RE 1996 85 A CRIM R 343

RSC O.11 r8

O'CONNOR V COMMERCIAL GENERAL & MARINE LTD 1996 1 IR 68

COOKNEY V ANDERSON 1863 1 DE G J & S 365

BROWNLIE PRINCIPLES OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW 5ED 310

SHORT V IRELAND 1996 2 IR 188

TAHER MEATS (IRL) LTD V STATE CO FOR FOODSTUFF TRADING 1991 1 IR 443

JEFFREY V DPP 1995 121 FLR 16

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1987 (AUSTRALIA)

DPP V LOGAN PARK INVESTMENTS PYT LYD 1995 ALR 449

CRAIES ON STATUTE LAW 7ED 109, 387

R V CUTHBERTSON 1981 AC 470

AAMAND V SMITHWICK 1995 1 ILRM 61

ROLLINSON, STATE V KELLY 1984 IR 248

MURPHY, STATE V JOHNSTON 1983 IR 235

HOWARD V COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC WORKS 1994 1 IR 101

DIRECT UNITED STATES CABLE CO V ANGLO-AMERICAN TELEGRAPH CO 1877 2 AC 394

KING V BURRELL 1840 12 AD & EL 460

TINKHAM V PERRY 1851 1 TLR 91

MAXWELL INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES 12ED 29

HAMILTON V HAMILTON 1982 IR 466

NESTOR V MURPHY 1979 IR 326

LUKE V INLAND REVENUE COMMISSIONERS 1963 AC 557

MCCANN LTD V O CULACHAIN 1986 IR 196

ALDER V GEORGE 1964 1 AER 628

D (A MINOR) V BERKSHIRE CO COUNCIL 1987 1 AER 20

MULLINS V HARNETT 1998 2 ILRM 304

BENNION ON STATUTORY INTERPRETATION 2ED 257 & 382

INSPECTOR OF TAXES V KIERNAN 1981 IR 117

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1996 S7(1)

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1996 S15(1)

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1996 S13(1)

M V D 1990 3 IR 175

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF TAXATION V KUNZ 21 ATR 949

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1996 S10

AG OF NEW ZEALAND V ORTIZ 1984 1 AC 1

APOLLON, THE 1824 9 WHEAT 362

STORY CONFLICT OF LAWS 2ED 26

MANN STUDIES IN INTERNATIONAL LAW (1973) 1–139

ALONSO V CORNERO 1611 HOB 212, 2 BROWNL 29

KING OF ITALY V MARQUIS COSIMO DE MEDICI TORNAQUINCI 1918 34 TLR 623

BROKAW V SEATRAIN (UK) LTD 1971 2 QB 476

ARAB BANK PLC V MERCANTILE HOLDINGS LTD 1994 CH 71

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION V ARABIAN AMERICAN OIL CO 499 US 244

FOLEY BROS, IN RE 336 US 285

BENZ V COMPANIA NAVIERA HIDALGO SA 353 US 138

R V CUTHBERTSON 1981 AC 470

FRANKFURTHER V W L EXNER LTD 1947 1 CH 629

BUCHANAN LTD & ANOR V MCVEY 1954 IR 89

TREACY V DPP 1971 AC 537

BONALUMI V SECRETARY OF STATE FOR HOME DEVELOPMENT 1985 1 AER 797

GOLD STAR PUBLICATIONS LTD V DPP 1981 2 AER 257

PARAMOUNT AIRWAYS LTD, IN RE 1992 3 AER 1

SAWERS, IN RE EX-PARTE BLAIN 1879 12 CH 522

HOLMES V BANGLADESH BIMAN CORP 1989 1 AER 852

JUDICATURE (IRL) ACT 1877 S28(8)

PENN V LORD BALTIMORE 1750 1 VES SEN 444

KEANE EQUITY & THE LAW OF TRUSTS IN IRELAND (1988) PARA 3.06

MAUDSLAY SONS & FIELD, IN RE 1900 1 CH 602

DERBY & CO LTD V WELDON (NO 3 & 4) 1900 1 CH 65

BENNETT ENTERPRISES INC V LIPTON 1999 1 ILRM 81

MAHON V BUTLER 1998 1 ILRM 284

DERBY & CO LTD V WELDON (NO 2) 1989 1 AER 1002

GALLIGAN IRISH PLANNING LAW & PROCEDURE (1997) 27

AVENUE PROPERTIES LTD V FARRELL HOMES LTD 1982 ILRM 21

LOCAL GOVT (PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT) ACT 1976 S27(3)

O'CONNOR & SPOLLEN GROUP LTD V FRANK HARRINGTON LTD UNREP BARR 28.5.1987 1987/8/2101

WYLIE JUDICATURE ACTS 701

VOLUNTARY PURCHASING GROUP V INSURCO LTD 1995 2 ILRM 145

EAST DONEGAL CO-OP LTD V AG 1970 IR 317

CROKE V SMITH (NO 2) 1998 1 IR 101

BURKE, STATE V LENNON 1940 IR 136

OZTURK V GERMANY 1984 6 EHRR 409

BENDENOUN V FRANCE 1994 18 EHRR 54

BENHAM V UNITED KINGDOM 1996 22 EHRR 293

MELLING V O MATHGHAMHNA 1962 IR 1

AG V CASEY 1930 IR 163

GETTINS, STATE V FAWSITT 1945 IR 183

AG V SOUTHERN INDUSTRIAL TRUST LTD & SIMONS 1960 94 ILTR 161

CONSTITUTION ART 38.1

CONSTITUTION ART 38.5

CUSTOMS (TEMPORARY PROVISIONS) ACT 1945 S5(1)(a)

CUSTOMS (TEMPORARY PROVISIONS) ACT 1945 S5(3)

LEE V DANGAR GRANT & CO 1892 2 QB 337

BAGGE V WHITEHEAD 1892 2 QB 355

CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1994 S63

CLANCY V IRELAND 1988 IR 326

MCLOUGHLIN V TUITE 1989 IR 82

O'KEEFFE V FERRIS 1997 2 ILRM 161

UNITED STATE V HALPER 490 US 435

AUSTIN V UNITED STATES 509 US 602

DEPT OF REVENUE OF MONTANA V KURTH RANCH 511 US

UNITED STATES V URSERY 518 US 267

VARIOUS ITEMS OF PERSONAL PROPERTY V US 1931 282 US 577

ONE LOT EMERALD CUT STONES & ONE RING V US 1972 409 US 232

EIGHTY-NINE (89) FIREARMS, IN RE 79 L ED 2d 361

CALERO-TOLEDO V PEARSON YACHT LEASING CO 1994 416 US 663, 40 L ED 2d 452 & 94 S CT 2080

BENNIS V MICHIGAN 134 L ED 2d 68, 116 S CT 994

UNITED STATES V BAJAKAJIAM 524 US 321

NORTH GEORGIA FINISHING INC V DI-CHEM INC 1975 419 US 601

OFFENCES AGAINST THE STATE (AMDT) ACT 1985 S3

ZIMMERMANN & STEINER V SWITZERLAND 6 EHRR 17

GUINCHO V PORTUGAL 7 EHRR 223

O'BRIEN V BORD NA MONA 1983 IR 255

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1996 S4(1)

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1996 S4(2)

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1996 S4(6)

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1996 S4(7)

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1996 S4(8)

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1996 S3(3)

RSC O.40 r4

DPP V MCGINLEY 1998 2 IR 408 1998 2 ILRM 233

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA V $129727 US CURRENCY & TRUJILLO 129 F 3d 486

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1996 S8(2)

CAMPUS OIL LTD V MIN FOR INDUSTRY & ENERGY 1983 IR 88

O'LEARY V AG 1993 1 IR 102, 1995 1 IR 254

CARWAY V AG 1996 3 IR 300

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1996 S8(1)

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1996 S1(1)

COX V IRELAND 1992 2 IR 503

KELLY IRISH CONSTITUTION 3ED 732

CAHILL V SUTTON 1980 IR 269

KING V AG 1981 IR 233

CONSTITUTION 40.3.1

MCDONALD V BORD NA GCON 1965 IR 217, 1965 100 ILTR 89

TRIBE AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2ED 684

LANZETTA V NEW JERSEY 1939 306 US 451

HARRIS O'BOYLE & WARBRICK LAW OF THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS (1995) 207

RUIZ-MATEOS V SPAIN 1993 16 EHRR 505

BEHEER V NETHERLANDS 1993 18 EHRR 213

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1996 S2(1)(5)

C, STATE V MIN FOR JUSTICE 1967 IR 106

BUCKLEY V AG 1950 IR 67

MAHER V AG 1973 IR 140

MCELDOWNEY, STATE V KELLEHER 1983 IR 289

CASHMAN V CLIFFORD 1989 IR 121

STRAN GREEK REFINERIES V GREECE 1994 19 EHRR 293

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1996 S2(5)

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1996 S8

CONSTITUTION ART 34.1

AG FOR AUSTRALIA V R & BOILER-MAKERS SOCIETY OF AUSTRALIA 1957 AC 288

COUNTYGLEN PLC (UNDER INVESTIGATION), IN RE 1995 1 ILRM 213

O, STATE V O'BRIEN 1973 IR 50

SINGER, IN RE 1963 97 ILTR 130

MCGLINCHEY V GOV OF PORTLAOISE PRISON 1988 IR 671

R LTD, IN RE 1989 IR 126, 1989 ILRM 757

CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1994 S63

TAYLOR V SERIOUS FRAUD OFFICE 1998 4 AER 801

DESMOND & DEDEIR V GLACKIN 1993 3 IR 67

MARCEL V COMMISSIONER OF POLICE 1991 2 WLR 1118

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1996 S3(5)

PROCEEDS OF CRIME ACT 1996 S9

CONSTITUTION ART 34.4.6

CHESTVALE PROPERTIES LTD V GLACKIN 1993 3 IR 35

DUBLIN CO COUNCIL V GREALY 1990 1 IR 77

ATHLUMNEYS CASE 1898 2 QB 547

HEFFERON KEARNS LTD (NO 1), IN RE 1993 3 IR 177

LAND COMMISSION V DOLAN 1930 IR 235

O'H V O'H 1990 2 IR 558

Synopsis

Constitutional Law

Proceeds of Crime Act, 1996; constitutionality; whether appointment of receiver prevented the making of a freezing order; whether Act had extra-territorial effect; whether circumstances in which Act was passed have consequence that presumption of constitutionality attached to Act is less strong; whether proceedings under the Act are civil or criminal in nature; whether forfeiture of property infringes right to private property; whether respondents prejudiced by delay between making of interim order and hearing of interlocutory action; whether principle of res judicata prevents the respondents from reapplying to have the interlocutory order varied or discharged; whether hearsay evidence should be admissible in the interlocutory hearing given that it is not an ordinary interlocutory hearing in that there is no requirement for undertaking in damages and the substantive case would not be heard for seven years; whether the standard of proof required under the Act is balance of probabilities; whether shifting of onus of proof from applicant to respondent is unconstitutional; whether respondent entitled to statement of claim and discovery to inform him of case being made against him and case he has to answer; whether Act is overbroad; whether Act is excessively vague; whether Act is unconstitutional in that it requires the court to carry out executive functions.

Held: Constitutionality of Proceeds of Crime, Act 1996 upheld; respondents in possession of money which constituted directly or indirectly the proceeds of crime.

Murphy. v. M. (G) - High Court: O'Higgins J. - 04/06/1999

The Proceeds of Crime Act 1996 did not seek to have the domestic law of one state enforced by another state. An injunction under section 3 operates in personam and does not normally offend the principle that Courts of this country refrain from making orders which infringe the exclusive jurisdiction of courts of other countries. The test of whether legislation was criminal or not was determined by reference to the offences allegedly created. The provisions of the Proceeds of Crime Act were not criminal in nature. It is open to the legislature to shift the onus of proof in civil cases. In the circumstances, the respondent was in a unique position to account for the property the subject of the proceedings. Accordingly it was not unfair or contrary to any concept of equality of arms on the onus shifting in a civil action on the attaining of certain proofs. So held by the High Court in granting the statutory injunction in...