Criminal Assets Bureau -v- J.McN. [2017] IESC 30 (25 May 2017)

Criminal Assets Bureau -v- J.McN. [2017] IESC 30 (25 May 2017)

The proceedings should be dismissed because there was no sufficient evidence before the court to establish that Revenue Bureau Officer 32, acting in the name of CAB, was entitled to bring proceedings in his own name for the recovery of tax. Neither a certificate under s.966(3) nor other admissible evidence of such authority was provided.

Citation
[2017] IESC 30
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Criminal Assets Bureau; Defendant/appellant: J. McN.
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
25 May 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil (tax Recovery) / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed; proceedings dismissed
Legal Topics
Entitlement to Sue, Summary Judgment, Statutory Interpretation, Authority of Revenue Officers
Tax Law Civil Procedure Entitlement to Sue Summary Judgment Statutory Interpretation Authority of Revenue Officers

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Criminal Assets Bureau

Plaintiff/respondent

J. McN.

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil (tax Recovery) / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Revenue Bureau Officer 32 (using the name CAB) was entitled to bring proceedings in his own name for recovery of tax
  2. 2 Whether a certificate under s.966(3) of the Taxes Consolidation Act, 1997 is the only means to establish such entitlement
  3. 3 Whether sufficient evidence was provided to establish the officer's authority to sue

Ratio Decidendi

The proceedings should be dismissed because there was no sufficient evidence before the court to establish that Revenue Bureau Officer 32, acting in the name of CAB, was entitled to bring proceedings in his own name for the recovery of tax. Neither a certificate under s.966(3) nor other admissible evidence of such authority was provided.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; proceedings dismissed

Orders

  • Order dismissing the proceedings