property rights

Question 1

what does the constitution say about property ?

Answer 1

The Constitution declares that the State will vindicate the property rights of every citizen. This means that you have a right to own, transfer and inherit property. You also have the right to bequeath property upon your death. The State guarantees to pass no law to abolish these rights.

Question 2

what does article 43 acknowledge ?

Answer 2

Article 43 acknowledges that these rights ought to be regulated by the principles of social justice. This means that the State may pass laws limiting your right to private property in the interests of the common good.

Question 3

what happens if the state passes a law that restricts your property rights

Answer 3

If the state passes a law that restricts your property rights, it may be required to compensate you for this restriction.

Question 4

what are some Examples of restrictions or limitations on your right to own property

Answer 4

town and regional planning, protection of national monuments, compulsory acquisition of land and property taxes.

Question 5

what happened in the case of blake v attorney general

Answer 5

the plaintiff challenged the provisions of the Rent restrictions Acts 1960- 1967.

Question 6

why was the rent restrictions act designed ?

Answer 6

These measures were designed broadly to control rental prices and to protect the tenancy rights of person renting designated properties

Question 7

when did the rent restrictions act apply?

Answer 7

This legislation applied, moreover, only to properties built before 1941 and not thereafter.

Question 8

what did the supreme court conclude on rent controls?

Answer 8

the supreme court concluded that the rent controls constituted an unjust attack on property rights

Of special significance was the fact that the legislation arbitrarily distinguished between properties built before and after 1941 , with no good reason for so doing.

Question 9

what happened in the case of Iarnód Éireann v ireland

Answer 9

Irish rail challenged the constitutionality of ss 12 and 14 of the Civil Liability Act 1961

Question 10

describe ss 12 and 14 of the Civil Liability Act 1961

Answer 10

Under these sections, where two defendants are held currently liable for wrong suffered by a plaintiff , that plaintiff is entitled to enforce its full award of damages against either defendant, notwithstanding the level of fault of that defendant. The defendant is then entitled to claim back from the other defendant the proportion of the award for which that other defendant was liable.

Question 11

what happened in the gaspari case ?

Answer 11

A Mr Gaspari, having been injured in a train accident caused by a collision with a herd of cattle on the line, sued Irish Rail, and the owner of the cattle, Irish rail was held 30 percent responsible for the accident, the cattle owner being held 70 percent responsible. As the cattle owner was of inadequate means, Mr Gaspari sought the full amount from Irish rail.

Question 12

what did keane j say about the proportionality test ?

Answer 12

Keane J held that the proportionality test should be applied to assess the legitimacy of the interference with property rights.

Question 13

what did keane j decided in relation to the proportionality test ?

Answer 13

Despite stating a proportionality test, Keane j decided the case more by means of an inquiry into the justice of the legislation

Question 14

what happened in the case of madigan v attorney general ?

Answer 14

In madigan v Attorney General , the supreme Court upheld constitutionality of residential property tax.

Question 15

what does the constitution expressly mention in article 44.2.6

Answer 15

the constitution expressly mentions the right to compensation only in article 44.2.6, where property is being compulsorily purchased from a religious order, it is suggested that the seizure of property without compensation would, in almost every other case, constitute an “unjust attack” on the property rights of the individual.

Question 16

what happened in the case of central Dublin development Association v Attorney general ?

Answer 16

There the learned judge suggested that, as a general rule, state acquisition of full ownership rights in a property without compensation “ would in all cases be such an unjust attack”.

Question 17

what happened in the case of E.S.B v Gormley

Answer 17

in E.S.B v Gormley, the supreme court ruled that a property owner had to be compensated by the E.S.B.
for the routing of large electricity pylons through his land. Although the court agreed that the E.S.B. could undertake this work without the owner’s consent.
This being necessary to promote the interests of the common good, it concluded that their refusal to compensate the defendant constituted a breach of his property rights.

Question 18

what happens in times of emergency in relation to the right to compensation

Answer 18

n times of emergency, then, the compulsory seizure of a full interest in land cannot legally proceed without compensation being given. Even where a limited interest in land is being taken, moreover, the courts may sometimes demand that compensation is given to prevent an “unjust attack” on the property owner’s rights.