O'Shea v Cork Rural District Council

JurisdictionIreland
CourtKing's Bench Division (Ireland)
Judgment Date13 November 1913
Date13 November 1913

O'SHEA
and

CORK RURAL DISTRICT COUNCIL.

CHANCERY DIVISION

Local Government —— Improvement Scheme — Application for letting of cottage — Right of preference — Scheme not founded on applicant's representation — Special damage — Joinder of Attorney-General ——— Practoce — Action Against public body — Public body — Naming special defendants — Costs.

Attorney-General (Annally) v. Guardians of the Bally mahon Union 21 L. R. I. 534.

Attorney-General (Humphreys) v. Governors of Erasmus Smith's SchoolsIR [1910] 1 I. R. 325.

Attorney-General (Rhondda Urban District Council) v. Pontypridd Waterworks Co.ELR [1908] 1 Ch. 388.

Attorney-General (Spalding Rural District Council) v. GarnerELR [1907] 2 K. B. 480.

Attorney-General v. Guardians of Merthyr Tydfil UnionELR [1900] 1 Ch. 516.

Ayscough v. BullarELR 41 Ch. D. 341.

Boyce v. Paddington Borough CouncilELR [1903] 1 Ch. 109.

Irish Society v. FlemingIR [1911] 1 I. R. 323, 353.

Tevlin v. Lisnaskea Rural District CouncilIR [1914] 2 I. R. 15.

Weir v. Fermanagh County CouncilIR [1913] 1 I. R. 193.

Weir's CaseIR [1913] 1 I. R. 193.

16 THE IRISH REPORTS. [1914.. M. B. O'SHEA v. CORK RURAL DISTRICT COUNCIL 1913. Nov. 12, 13. Local Government — Labourers (Ireland) Acts — Improvement Scheme —Application for letting of cottage—Right of preference—Scheme not founded on applicant's representation — Special damage — Joinder of Attorney-General—Labourers (Ireland) Act, 1883 (46 4, 47 Vict. c. 60), a. 13—Labourers (Ireland) Act, 1906 (6 Edw. 7, c. 37), 8. 29—PracticeÂAction against public body—Naming special defendants—Costs. The defendants had acquired a plot of land under an improvement scheme under the Labourers (Ireland) Acts and built a cottage on it. The plaintiff, who was an agricultural labourer, but who had not signed the representation on which the scheme was founded, and was not one of the persons on whose representation it was founded, applied to the defendants to have the first letting of the cottage made to him. No other person, qualified to have a letting made to him under the Acts, applied for a letting. The defendants rejected the plaintiff's application, and let the cottage to a person not an agricultural labourer. The plaintiff having brought an action claiming an injunction and damages Held, that as no private legal right of the plaintiff had been infringed, be could not sustain the action. Held also, that even if the Attorney-General were joined as a plaintiff, the action would not be maintainable. Tevlin v. Lisnaskea Rural District Council ([1914] 2 I. R. 15) distinguished. When misconduct in the performance of their duties is alleged against a public body, and it becomes necessary to take legal proceedings against them, the individual members who are principally responsible ought to be made special defendants for the purpose of visiting them with the costs of the action. TRIAL OF ACTION. Under the Cork Rural District Labourers (Opposed) Order (No. 2), 1908, the Cork Rural District Council were authorized to acquire a plot, numbered 2381a, containing 1A. Oa. 14p., at Gurranebraher in the Cork Rural District. The representaÂtion upon which this plot was acquired was signed by a man named J. Collins. A labourer's cottage was subsequently erected on this plot ; and at their meeting on 6th June, 1912, the rural district council appointed Richard Casey tenant of the cottage, VOL. I.] CHANCERY DIVISION. the original applicant, J. Collins, having stated that he did not require it. This appointment was made subject to the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Moore and Others v Attorney-General and Others (No. 3)
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court (Irish Free State)
    • 11 April 1930
    ...R. 2 C. L. 143. (3) [1903] 1 Ch. 109, at p. 113; [1903] 2 Ch. 556; [1906] A. C. 1. (4) L. R. 2 Ex. 316. (5) [1913] 1 I. R. 63, 193. (6) [1914] 1 I. R. 16. (7) [1902] 1 I. R. 13. (8) [1910] 1 I. R. 325. (9) 2 Beav. 313. (10) 4 My. & Cr. 262. (11) 3 Beav. 447. (12) 15 Beav. 397, at p. 401. (1......
  • Harrington v Crowley
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 1 January 1946
    ...Beav. 144. (2) 1 Dr. and War. 258. (1) [1902] A. C. 165. (2) 2 Keen. 8. (1) 9 Eq. 11. (1) 1 You. & J. 574. (1) 47 I. L. T. R. 11. (2) [1914] 1 I. R. 16. (1) The order of Johnston J. is set out in the judgment of Murnaghan J.post, p. (1) L. R. 3 Ch. App. 800. (2) 21 Ch. D. 111. (1) 15 Moore ......

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