Skip to content

cearta.ie

the Irish for rights

Menu
  • About
  • Privacy Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Contact
  • Research

Category: Restitution

Conference on Restitution of Overpaid Tax

1 April, 201029 March, 2010
| 2 Comments
| Conferences, Lectures, Papers and Workshops, Restitution

'The Tax Collectors' by van Reymerswaele, via wikimedia commonsThe School of Law, Trinity College Dublin, Pump Court Tax Chambers and One Essex Court are delighted to announce a conference on

Restitution of Overpaid Tax

which will take place in Merton College Oxford on the weekend of Friday 9 and Saturday 10 July 2010.

In Woolwich Equitable Building Society v Inland Revenue Commissioners [1993] AC 70 (HL), the House of Lords held that taxes unlawfully exacted by the Revenue are recoverable by the taxpayer as of right. The recent decisions of the Court of Appeal in Test Claimants In the Franked Investment Group Litigation v Commissioners of the Inland Revenue [2010] EWCA Civ 103 (23 February 2010) and FJ Chalke Ltd v Revenue & Customs [2010] EWCA Civ 313 (25 March 2010) demonstrate that many fundamental elements of the Woolwich principle still remain to be resolved. Eminent contributors will explore the general issue of restitution of overpaid taxes from various perspectives – for example, the tax background, various private law claims, alternative public law approaches, defences, and remedies – and in various jurisdictions (such as Australia, Canada, the EU, Germany, Ireland, and New Zealand, as well as the UK).

Details Programme | Contributors | Abstracts | Venue | Bookings | Contact | Updates…

Read More »

Espionage is a serious business – redux

10 February, 20109 February, 2010
| 2 Comments
| Conferences, Lectures, Papers and Workshops, Freedom of Expression, Restitution

Cover of George Blake Further to my earlier post about last week’s Current Legal Problem lecture on

Spies Like Us? Frank Snepp and George Blake: Freedom of Speech and Restitutionary Remedies

the paper is now available here, via Scrib’d. It’s a good remedy for insomnia. All comments gratefully received.…

Read More »

Espionage is a serious business: freedom of speech and restitutionary remedies

2 February, 20102 February, 2010
| 5 Comments
| Conferences, Lectures, Papers and Workshops, Freedom of Expression, Restitution

Cover of 'Decent Interval' by Frank Snepp, via his siteOver sixty years ago, the Faculty of Laws at University College London established the Current Legal Problems lecture series and accompanying annual volume as a major reference point for a broad range of legal scholarship opinion, theory, methodology, and subject matter, with an emphasis upon contemporary developments of law. The lectures are held at the Faculty of Law, Bentham House, Endsleigh Gardens, London WC1 from 6-7pm; they are open to the public and free of charge. This week‘s current legal issue is:

Spies Like Us? Frank Snepp and George Blake: Freedom of Speech and Restitutionary Remedies

“Espionage is a serious business” sang a moderately famous Irish pop singer of the 1980s. And so it is. It can be even more of a business when former spies seek to publish their memoirs, and things can get very serious indeed if they fail to seek the clearance of their former spymasters in advance. The decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States in Snepp v US 444 US 507 (1980) and of the House of Lords in AG v Blake [2001] 1 AC 268; [2000] UKHL 45 (27 July 2000) make a fascinating pair of cases in which former spies (unsuccessfully) argued that a restitutionary remedy against uncleared publication of their memoirs infringed their speech rights.…

Read More »

No UKSC Christmas Present for Vodafone

5 January, 20103 January, 2010
| No Comments
| Restitution

vodafone logo, via vodafone siteCases dealing with the consequences of the European Court of Justice, striking down national tax provisions as inconsistent with EU law, just seem to keep on coming. In C-196/04 Cadbury Schweppes v Commissioners of Inland Revenue [2006] ECR I-7995 [2006] EUECJ C-196/04 (12 September 2006) the ECJ called the Controlled Foreign Companies taxation provisions of the Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 into question, having regard to EU law. Important restitution questions would then have arisen. However, in Vodafone 2 v HM Revenue & Customs [2009] EWCA Civ 446 (22 May 2009) the Court of Appeal (reversing the High Court [2008] EWHC 1569 (Ch) (04 July 2008)) nevertheless concluded that the provisions were susceptible to an interpretation conforming with EU law. The question now to be decided by the Tax Tribunal is therefore whether the vodafone arrangment is within that interpretation on the facts. But this appears to be the end of the line so far as the law is concerned. Just before Christmas, the UKSC blog reported that the UK Supreme Court declined to give Vodafone a Christmas present of leave to appeal against the Court of Appeal’s decision:

It was widely expected that this case would be heard by the Supreme Court.

…

Read More »

Tory Island and Unjust Enrichment – the conclusion

9 November, 200928 November, 2012
| 1 Comment
| Restitution, Tory Island

Oyster Pots on Tory Island, by MarsW via FlickrI wrote last April and again last July about the case brought by film-maker Neville Presho, whose holiday home on Tory Island had disappeared in his absence, replaced by a car park for an adjacent hotel. In July, Murphy J held that Mr Presho was entitled to a comparable dwelling on the island or its market value. The matter was adjourned to last week when the judge heard there were significant differences between the sides over what valuation could be put on an equivalent house in Tory. Today, in the High Court, Murphy J awarded Mr Presho €46,000 as damages for trespass and interference with his property (RTÉ news | Irish Times breaking news. Update Irish Examiner | Irish Independent | Irish Times). At an earlier stage in the proceedings, Murphy J had suggested that these damages could be calculated to prevent the defendant’s unjust enrichment, but there is no hint of this in today’s press reports. In the absence of written judgments in this saga, this will probably have to count as another colourful but missed opportunity in the development of the Irish law of restitution for unjust enrichment.…

Read More »

Only in California – breach of contract and unjust enrichment

28 October, 200913 November, 2009
| No Comments
| Contract, Restitution

Carrie Prejean via the BBC websiteBy Meredith R Miller on ContractsProf Blog, a story that needs no further commentary:

Was Carrie Prejean Unjustly Enriched? (Nudge Nudge Wink Wink)

You’ll undoubtedly recall that, back in May, we mentioned that Miss California USA (aka Donald Trump) might terminate then-Miss California Carrie Prejean for breach of contract; Prejean was in fact de-crowned, and she sued the pageant organizers for a whole host of things, including discrimination based on her anti-gay marriage stance and violation of her privacy when a representative acknowledged publicly that she had breast implants. The franchise wasted no time with a countersuit and, according to CNN, one of the claims seeks to recover some $5000 the pageant organizers loaned Prejean for the breast implant surgery – pursuant to an oral agreement between the parties.

Some stories, even contracts profs can’t make up. This ugly tale of caution is one of them.

Update (12 November 2009): the case has settled, but controversy continues to follow her.…

Read More »

Subrogation and unjust enrichment – hunting the snark

20 October, 200913 December, 2012
| 4 Comments
| High Court of Australia, Restitution, Subrogation

The Hunting of the Snark, via Chicago Sun-TimesThe Hunting of the Snark is a nonsense poem written by Lewis Carroll subtitled An Agony in 8 Fits. In Fit 6, the Barrister dreams that the eponymous Snark serves as counsel for the defence, finds the verdict as the jury, and passes sentence as the judge. Perhaps it is fitting then to observe that, by way of update to yesterday’s post about Bofinger v Kingsway Group Limited [2009] HCA 44 (13 October 2009), Legal Eagle on SkepticLawyer characterises the judgment as “yet another snark at unjust enrichment”. True, but reaffirming a light approach to the “unifying legal concept” of unjust enrichment is not necessarily a bad thing, even if the tone is indeed unnecessarily snarky. She does concede that, “to give the High Court credit where credit is due, it gives reasoned arguments for rejecting the Banque Financière decision (see Banque Financière de la Cité v Parc (Battersea) Ltd [1999] 1 AC 221; [1998] UKHL 7 (26 February 1998)). It would sound quite reasonable if it weren’t for the usual snark beforehand” (given my views in my earlier post, it’s no surprise that I agree with her here). Her snark is that the Court does not provide similarly reasoned arguments for what she sees as negative knee-jerk responses to unjust enrichment reasoning.…

Read More »

Subrogation and unjust enrichment in the High Court of Australia

19 October, 200913 December, 2012
| 3 Comments
| High Court of Australia, Restitution, Subrogation

Kingsway logo, via their websiteBy means of the doctrine of subrogation, one person is substituted for another in the exercise of that other’s rights against a third person. In the classic triangular fact pattern, it arises where a creditor has rights against a debtor, and the claimant is subrogated to the rights of the creditor against the debtor. It is a doctrine which admits of many possible explanations. For example, on the view taken by Meagher, Gummow & Lehane, subrogation largely follows a similar pattern in a series of otherwise unconnected islands: they are content to set out the categories, which, for them, are not closed, and to conclude that there are no universally applicable criteria for the intervention of equity in such cases. On another view of subrogation, taken by Hedley, and by Lord Salmon in Orakpo v Manson Investments [1978] AC 95 (HL), there are some relatively loose connections between the specific contexts but only at an abstract level: Hedley argues for a broad general principle that (subject to defences) the claimant can exercise whatever rights the creditor would, but for the claimant’s payment, have had against the debtor; whilst Lord Salmon argued for an “entirely empirical … principle … that the doctrine will be applied only when the courts are satisfied that reason and justice demand that it should be”.…

Read More »

Posts navigation

Previous 1 … 10 11 12 … 14 Next

Welcome

Me in a hat

Hi there! Thanks for dropping by. I’m Eoin O’Dell, and this is my blog: Cearta.ie – the Irish for rights.


“Cearta” really is the Irish word for rights, so the title provides a good sense of the scope of this blog.

In general, I write here about private law, free speech, and cyber law; and, in particular, I write about Irish law and education policy.


Academic links
Academia.edu
ORCID
SSRN
TARA

Subscribe

  • RSS Feed
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

Recent posts

  • Some of #RushdiesWords on free speech from Joseph Anton
  • Some practical perspective on the recovery of misdirected payments
  • It’s good to TalkTalk – Part 2: negligence claims for data breaches
  • It’s good to TalkTalk – Part 1: misuse of private information claims for data breaches
  • Political expression, autonomous communication, and anti-social behaviour orders: a note on Tallon v DPP [2022] IEHC 322 (31 May 2022)
  • On the Internet, does Article 17 know you’re a dog?
  • The nutty wing of the Originalist camp is now in the SCOTUS ascendency – is it the death knell for tiers of scrutiny, especially in the First Amendment context?

Archives by month

Categories by topic

Recent tweets

Tweets by @cearta

Licence

Creative Commons License

This blog is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. I am happy for you to reuse and adapt my content, provided that you attribute it to me, and do not use it commercially. Thanks. Eoin

Credit where it’s due

Some of those whose technical advice and help have proven invaluable in keeping this show on the road include Dermot Frost, Karlin Lillington, Daithí Mac Síthigh, and
Antoin Ó Lachtnáin. I’m grateful to them; please don’t blame them :)

Thanks to Blacknight for hosting.

Feeds and Admin

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

© cearta.ie 2022. Powered by WordPress