R (Parker) v Carrigrohane Drainage Board

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 26 April 1901
• Date: 26 April 1901
• Court: Queen's Bench Division (Ireland)

Reg. (Parker)

and

Carrigrohane Drainage Board (1).

Q. B. Div.

CASES

DETERMINED BY

THE KING'S BENCH DIVISION

OF

THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN IRELAND,

AND ON APPEAL THEREFROM IN

THE COURT OF APPEAL,

AND BY

THE COURT FOR CROWN CASES RESERVED.

1902.

Drainage Board — Power to levy rates to pay damages and costs of a successful plaintiff in an action brought against the Board for negligence — Mandamus.

Mandamus may issue against a drainage board to compel such board to levy a rate to enable them to pay the amount of damages and costs awarded against them in an action for injuries sustained by reason of their negligence in the construction of their authorised works.

Mandamus. This was an application to make absolute a conditional order for mandamus directed to the Carrigrohane, Maglin, and Ballincollig Drainage Board, directing them to pay to the applicant the sum of £189 1s. 8d., and if necessary for that purpose to strike an assessment rate upon the proprietors of lands within their district sufficient to pay the said sum.

The drainage scheme petition was presented to the Board of Works on the 18th March, 1893, and the provisional order constituting

the drainage district was confirmed by Act of Parliament, 58 & 59 Vict., c. ix.

The applicant's land was injured in the negligent carrying out of the works, and she obtained judgment for £10, which, with the costs of trial, new trial motion, and appeal to the Court of Appeal, amounted to £189 1s. 8d.

The respondents refused to discharge this claim, and, as cause against the mandamus, alleged that they had no moneys out of which to discharge the amount, as the sum advanced to them by the Board of Works for the carrying out of the scheme had not been sufficient even to pay the contractor in full. They further submitted that the Drainage Acts, 1863 to 1892, under which they were constituted and acting, gave them no power to levy a rate for the purpose of paying the amount of such a judgment as that recovered by the applicant.

Matthew J. Bourke, K. C., and George C. Green, for the applicant.

A. M. Sullivan, for the respondents.

Cur. adv. vult.

The judgment of the Court was delivered by—

Matthew J. Bourke, K. C., and George C. Green, for the applicant.

A. M. Sullivan, for the respondents.

Boyd, J.:—

The question for decision in this case is whether the Drainage Board can be compelled to pay to the prosecutrix the sum of £189 1s. 8d.: £9 thereof being the balance of damages awarded by order and judgment...