Tevlin v Lisnaskea Rural District Council

JurisdictionIreland
CourtKing's Bench Division (Ireland)
Judgment Date25 June 1913
Date25 June 1913

K. B. Div.

Before PALLES, C.B., and MADDEN and KENNY, JJ.

TEVLIN
and

LISNASKEA RURAL DISTRICT COUNCIL

Atkinson v. Newcastle Waterworks Co.ELR 2 Ex. D. 441.

Attorney-General (Schofield) v. Dunmanway Rural District Council 47 I L. T. R. 11.

Cairncross v. LorimerUNK 3 Macq. 827.

Cavan country Council v. KaneIR [1913] 2 I. R. 250, at p. 253.

Clements v. Tyrone County CouncilIR [1905] 2 I. R. 415. 542.

Couch v. SteelENR 3 E. & B. 402.

Davis v. Bromley CorporationELR [1908] 1 K. B. 170.

Doe v. Bridges, per Lord Tenterden, C. J.ENR 1 B. & Ad. 847, at p. 859.

Harrington (Earl of) v. Derby CorporationELR [1905] 1 Ch. 205, at p. 222.

MADDEN and KENNY, JJ., concurred The Rural District Council served notice of appeal to the Court of Appeal, but subsequently withdrew it, and an order was made by the Court of Appeal on the 3rd December, 1913, striking out the appeal with costs. — [ED.]

Mersey Docks Trustees v. Gibbs, per Blackburn, J.ELR L. R. 1 H. L. 93, at p. 110.

per Buckley, J.; Cowley v. Newmarket Local BoardELR [1892] A. C. 345.

Rex (Ferguson) v. Lurgan Rural District CouncilDLTR 47 I. L. T. R. 31

Saunders v. Holborn District Board of WorksELR [1895] 1 Q. B. 64.

Wolverhampton New Waterworks Company v. HawkesfordUNK 28 L. J. C. P. 242, at p. 246.

Local Government —— Improvement scheme founded on representation signed by agricultural labourer — Right of action of labourer if not given preference on first letting — Plot suggested in representation not included in scheme — Omission of rural district council to make regulations for letting of cottages — Jurisdiction of Local Government Board as to selection of labourers for cottages —

Vos.. 11.] ICING'S BENCH DIVISION. 15 TEVLIN v. LISNASKEA RURAL DISTRICT COUNCIL (1). Local Government—Labourers (Ireland) Acts—Improvement scheme founded on representation signed bg agricultural labourer—Right of action of labourer if not given preference on first letting—Plot suggested in repreÂsentation not included in scheme—Omission of rural district council to make regulations for letting of cottages—Jurisdiction of Local Government Board as to selection of labourers for cottages—Labourers (Ireland) Act, 1906 (6 Edw. 37, c. 7), s. 29. Where land is acquired by a rural district council under an improvement scheme, made under the Labourers (Ireland) Acts and founded on a represenÂtation made on behalf of an agricultural labourer, such labourer has an action for damages against the district council if guilty of a breach of their statutory obligation, under sect. 29 of the Labourers (Ireland) Act, 1906 (2), to give him a preference on the first letting of a cottage or allotment. The action lies notwithstanding the omission by the district council to make regulations, pursuant to sub-sections 2 and 3 of section 29, providing for the giving of preference to agricultural labourers who have signed the representation on which the scheme is founded. The action lies notwithstanding that the particular plot suggested in the representation as a site for a cottage for such labourer is not included in the scheme. The selection of labourers for particular cottages is a matter outside the jurisdiction of the Local Government Board. (1) Before PALLES, C.B., and MADDEN and KENNY, JJ. (2) 6 Edw. 7, c. 37, s. 29, sub-s. 1: "The district council shall make regulations with respect to the letting of cottages and allotments under the Labourers Acts, and for preventing any undue preference in the letting thereof, and generally for carrying the provisions of the said Acts into effect." Sub-s. 2 : " Regulations under this section shall provide that, on the first letting of any cottages or allotments comprised in a scheme, preference shall be given to agricultural labourers who have signed on their own behalf the representation on which the scheme was founded, or on whose behalf that representation was made." Sub-s. 4 : " Regulations under this section shall not be of any force until confirmed by the Local Government Board in like manner and subject to the like provisions as in case of bye-laws under the Public Health (Ireland) Act, 1878." THE IRISH REPORTS. [1914. CASE STATED by Pallas, C.B., on the hearing of a civil-bill appeal. The appeal was from a dismiss pronounced by the County Court Judge of county Fermanagh. The civil-bill was for £50 damages for that the defendants the Lisnaskea Rural District Council, being under a statutory obligation under the Labourers (Ireland) Acts to provide a plot of land and a cottage for the plaintiff, refused to provide such; and for that the defendants, the said council, being under a statutory obligation to give the plaintiff a preference in the allotting of a plot of land in the townland of Derrylin, refused to give the plaintiff the said preference, and gave the plot in question to the defendant William Blake, a person who was not, under the said Acts, entitled to such plot ; and for an injunction restraining and prohibiting the defendants, the said council, from permitting the said lands to he occupied by any other person than the plaintiff. The annual value of the lands was stated not to exceed 30. Damages were sought against the defendant William Blake for aiding and abetting the defendants the council in their illegal acts, and for trespassing on the said plot. The Lord Chief Baron dismissed the civil-bill as against William Blake without costs, and no question arose as against him. As regards the rural district council, the following were the material facts stated by the Lord Chief Baron to be found by him or admitted :— The plaintiff was an agricultural labourer residing in the rural district of Lisnaskea. The Lisnaskea Rural District Council, prior to framing a scheme for the acquisition of land and the building of cottages under the Labourers (Ireland) Acts, had issued the usual advertisements intimating their intention to frame such scheme. Two representations (inter atia) under the Labourers Acts were lodged with the district council. One of these was lodged on behalf of the plaintiff, and suggested a cottage and plot for him, the cottage to be built for him in the townland of Mullyneeny, on the lands of Mr. Patrick Blake, the chairman of the Lisnaskea Rural District Council. The other representation had been lodged on behalf of John Curry, suggesting a cottage and VOL. II.] BING'S BENCH DIVISION. 17 plot of land for him, the cottage to be built on land in the town- K. B. Div. land of Derrylin, also the property of Mr. Blake. 1913. The council considered the representations, and decided that TEVLIN it would not be reasonable to take two plots and erect two cottages LISNISKE& ItAL on Mr. Blake's land. The chairman wrote at the foot of the /I Tii:ICT representation on behalf of the plaintiff—" Rejected; too many COUNCIL. applications for plots on same farm." The council decided to accede to the representation of John Curry for the plot in Derrylin. The district council framed a scheme in the form No. 15 in the schedule to the rules of the Local Government Board of November, 1906. Among the sites mentioned in the schedule to the scheme was a site described as " Doon, Derrylin, site No. 6, No. 38, 1A. 20p." The scheme did...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • McDaid v Milford Rural District Council
    • Ireland
    • Court of Appeal (Ireland)
    • 1 January 1919
    ...Held, by the King's Bench Division (Sir James Campbell C.J. and Dodd J.) (following Tevlin v. Lisnaskea Rural District CouncilIR, [1914] 2 I.R. 15), that a temporary letting under section 15 of the Labourers (Ir.) Act, 1886, is a letting of an allotment within section 29 of the Labourers (I......
  • O'Shea v Cork Rural District Council
    • Ireland
    • King's Bench Division (Ireland)
    • 13 November 1913
    ...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. Local Government —— Improvement Scheme — Applicat......
  • Marron v Cootehill (No. 2) Rural District Council
    • Ireland
    • Chancery Division (Ireland)
    • 22 January 1914
    ...[1913] 2 I. R. 241. Reeves v. PenroseUNK 26 L. R. Ir. 141. Tevlin v. Lisnaskea Rural District CouncilIR Unreported. Since reported [1914] 2 I. R. 15. Tevlin v. Lisnaskea Rural District CouncilIR [1914] 2 I. R. 15. Tevlin v. The Lisnaskea Rural District CouncilSC Since reported [1914] 21. R.......
  • Byrne v Hughes
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court (Irish Free State)
    • 18 April 1925
    ...be deprived of that jurisdiction by the non-existence of Rules of procedure or Forms. Tevlin v. Lisnaskea Rural District CouncilIR [1914] 2 I.R. 15; Canning v.FarrenIR [1907] 2 I.R. 486; and Attorney General for Ontario v. DalyELR[1924] A.C. 1011, followed. As the portion of the plaintiffs'......
  • 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