Dublin Anti Bin Tax Campaign win landmark court case

dublin | bin tax / household tax / water tax | news report

Tuesday December 07, 2004 16:02

by Donal Mac Fhearraigh - SWP

donal at swp dot ie

Brid Smith, Dublin Anti Bin Tax Campaign

The High Court this morning ruled in favour of a case appealed from the
Circuit Court on behalf of the Dublin City Campaign Against the Bin Tax.
In this landmark case, Justice Lindsay found that the City Council illegally
applied bin charges for the years 2001/2002, on the basis that they defied
their own criteria and failed to provide incentives for re-cycling.

The High Court this morning ruled in favour of a case appealed from the
Circuit Court on behalf of the Dublin City Campaign Against the Bin Tax.
This is a victory for the thousands of non-payers throughout the city.

The judgement vindicates the stance taken by the campaign, that the bin
charges are an unjust double tax. It will have major implications for the
Council policy of pursuing non-payers of the charges through the Courts.

In this landmark case, Justice Lindsay found that the City Council illegally
applied bin charges for the years 2001/2002, on the basis that they defied
their own criteria and failed to provide incentives for re-cycling. Because
the Council imposed a flat-charge, regardless of whether use was made of the
service or not, the charge was deemed illegal in this case.

The case was taken on appeal by two members of the campaign in Dublin.

The implications of this ruling are that nearly 300 cases pending for
non-payment of the charges in this period will fall. It could also mean
that those who did pay the charges could justifiably pursue a refund from
the Council.

According to Councillor Joan Collins of the campaign, “This proves that
people have been correct to refuse to pay this unjust double tax. On a daily
basis people all over Dublin are being bullied and threatened by the Council
because of these charges. Just this week thousands of threatening letters
from a debt collection company Legal & Trade have gone out all over Dublin.
In some cases the Council staff are phoning peoples homes and harassing them
for the bin charges. We believe this ruling will help our case in standing
up to the council’s tactics which have been marked by threats and jailings
in this high profile campaign. The Council are totally out of order”.

Disgracefully, Dublin City Councillors voted for a budget which includes a
74% increase in bin charges only last week. The resentment and anger of
Dublin citizens to this hike will be boosted by this ruling this morning.

For further information contact Brid Smith at 087 9090166 (spokesperson)

save preference

Comments (12 of 12)

For the record

by Interested

Tue Dec 07, 2004 16:32

This morning's case was in the Circuit Court not the High Court. The High Court has already ruled in favour of the Council in the Case Stated involving S. Wright.
Strangely the Circuit Court judge this morning failed to refer to the earlier judgement of Justice Quirke. This morning's judgement was on one case, a different Circuit Court judge might find differently in another case. Don't get too excited !

Also for the record

by Hari

Tue Dec 07, 2004 16:43

"In some cases the Council staff are phoning peoples homes and harassing them
for the bin charges".
This is not true. No Council Staff are involved in this practise. Councillor Collins should verify her facts before making such accusations.

Wrong - Telling it as it is

by Ickle Wig

Tue Dec 07, 2004 16:56

A case stated goes from the District Court to the High Court.
Check out District Court: Courts (Supplemental Provisions) Act 1961 ss 51 - 52
Methinks Interested is a trolling gobshite.

Well done them bin tax campaigners

Case Stated

Tue Dec 07, 2004 17:11

The first bin charge case to be heard in Dublin was on the 22nd September 2002 in the District Court before Judge Early.
The outcome of this case was a Case Stated, from the District Court, to the High Court on the Polluter Pays Principle.
This was duly adjudicated on by Justice Quirke, who found in favour of the City Council.
My earlier point was that it was unusual for a Circuit Court judge to fail to refer to an earlier ruling from a higher court.

Interested

by I W

Tue Dec 07, 2004 17:14

There is a difference between the 'Polluter Pays Principle' and the fact that the council illegally didn't implement that principle.

Council phone calls

by .

Tue Dec 07, 2004 17:23

Well, maybe it's not the voice of council staff but there is an automated dialler calling people and telling them they owe xxx and that the council will not put up with any more delays. They then get the option of paying immediately via credit card or talking to a customer service rep to arrange a repayment schedule.

I know cos I got a call yesterday. What disturbed me was how they got the phone number - since I have never received a bill in the name the phone number is registered to (there is a person called 'The Occupant' who the council corresponds with using my address but, since they don't live in the house we return the letters).

So, maybe a council employee is not the voice, and maybe the customer service rep is outsourced and maybe the system was developed by contractors but someone in the council gave the go ahead. Likewise with the (expensive) leaflet that was distributed detailing the bin charges before the council had approved them. This junk mail then told us how to be environmentally friendly by paying our bin charge and leaving our rubbish to pile up for a few weeks. Thank god it is never summer in Ireland and the waste will never smell or rot or be a health risk.

It is the council ringing

by ABTA

Tue Dec 07, 2004 17:29

Even if it's through Legal and Trade - it is the council or agents there of.

Landmark?

by Reuse, reduce, recycle

Wed Dec 08, 2004 11:27

"Dublin Anti Bin Tax Campaign win landmark court case "

So landmark, it hasn't been reported anywhere!

RTE News

by binlid

Wed Dec 08, 2004 11:35

You obviously weren't watching the RTE 6 o' clock news yesterday evening then.

Piece on the news

Wed Dec 08, 2004 11:41

Circuit Court

by Circuit Court

Thu Dec 09, 2004 22:26

RTE seem to think it was the Circuit Court!

A High Court decision is binding precident on the Ciruit Court.

This means that the Judge either wasn't aware of the previous High Court case or that the decision in the previous case didn't impact on this one as it related to a different question.

Either way, if they're facing 200 cases, they may decide to get the law in the areas settled by the High & even Supreme Courts, just so everyone knows exactly where they stand.

Non-collection?

by unpaid

Sat Jan 01, 2005 00:16

The council are now threatening to only collect bins which are "registered", this is another attempt to implement the policy of non-collection on which they had to back down before.
The council are also using a debt collection agency based near Ashtown Cross. The agency is sending out letters demanding payment within three days and threatening that they will initiate court proceedings.

Number of comments per page

Upcoming Events

New Events

Other Press

User Preferences

Feeds

Blog Feeds

Anti-Empire

The Saker

Public Inquiry

Dublin Anti Bin Tax Campaign win landmark court case

Comments (12 of 12)