Rooney -v- Minister for Agriculture and Food & ors [2010] IESC 55 (18 November 2010)

Rooney -v- Minister for Agriculture and Food & ors [2010] IESC 55 (18 November 2010)

The appellant failed to establish any actionable wrong by the Minister or respondents; the scheme was not unconstitutional or ultra vires, the compensation process was lawful, and the appellant's own conduct precluded any entitlement to damages. There was no denial of fair hearing or breach of privacy. The High Court's findings of fact were supported by evidence and not open to appellate interference.

Citation
[2010] IESC 55
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: John Rooney; Defendant/respondent: The Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry; Defendant/respondent: The Minister for Finance; Defendant/respondent: Ireland; Defendant/respondent: The Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
18 November 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; High Court order affirmed.
Legal Topics
Ultra Vires, Legitimate Expectation, Compensation Schemes, Judicial Review, Bias and Fair Hearing, Implementation of EU Directives, State Liability, Right to Privacy
Administrative Law Constitutional Law European Union Law Animal Health Law Ultra Vires Legitimate Expectation Compensation Schemes Judicial Review +4 more

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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Rooney

Plaintiff/appellant

The Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry

Defendant/respondent

The Minister for Finance

Defendant/respondent

Ireland

Defendant/respondent

The Attorney General

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Bovine T.B. Eradication Scheme as operated was unconstitutional, contrary to EU Directives, or ultra vires the Diseases of Animals Act 1966
  2. 2 Whether the appellant was denied a fair hearing in the High Court
  3. 3 Whether the compensation scheme was unlawful or gave rise to damages

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant failed to establish any actionable wrong by the Minister or respondents; the scheme was not unconstitutional or ultra vires, the compensation process was lawful, and the appellant's own conduct precluded any entitlement to damages. There was no denial of fair hearing or breach of privacy. The High Court's findings of fact were supported by evidence and not open to appellate interference.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; High Court order affirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • No order as to damages or further relief