Quinn -v- Ireland and A.G. & anor, Tector -v- Ireland and A.G. & anor, Quinn -v- Ireland A.G. & anor [2006] IESC 65 (28 November 2006)

Quinn -v- Ireland and A.G. & anor, Tector -v- Ireland and A.G. & anor, Quinn -v- Ireland A.G. & anor [2006] IESC 65 (28 November 2006)

The offences in question were created by the Oireachtas in s.20 of the Animal Remedies Act 1993, not by the Minister or by regulation. The Minister's regulations were made under the 1993 Act, and s.8(3)(b) only applies the annulment procedures of s.4 of the 1972 Act, not the prohibition on creating indictable offences. There is no ambiguity in the statutory language. Therefore, the regulations are not ultra vires and the appeal fails.

Citation
[2006] IESC 65
Parties
Applicant/appellant: Seamus Quinn; Applicant/appellant: Darragh Quinn; Applicant/appellant: Neil Tector; Respondents: Ireland, the Attorney General, and the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
28 November 2006
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; High Court order affirmed.
Legal Topics
Ultra Vires Regulations, Statutory Interpretation, Creation of Indictable Offences by Regulation, Annulment Procedures, Implementation of EU Law
Administrative Law Constitutional Law Criminal Law European Union Law Ultra Vires Regulations Statutory Interpretation Creation of Indictable Offences by Regulation Annulment Procedures +1 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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Seamus Quinn

Applicant/appellant

Darragh Quinn

Applicant/appellant

Neil Tector

Applicant/appellant

Ireland, the Attorney General, and the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Animal Remedies Regulations 1996, 1998, and 2002 are ultra vires section 3(2) of the European Communities Act 1972
  2. 2 Whether regulation 21(1) of the 1998 Regulations contravenes section 4(1) of the European Communities Act 1972
  3. 3 Whether the Minister had power to create an indictable offence by regulation under the relevant Acts

Ratio Decidendi

The offences in question were created by the Oireachtas in s.20 of the Animal Remedies Act 1993, not by the Minister or by regulation. The Minister's regulations were made under the 1993 Act, and s.8(3)(b) only applies the annulment procedures of s.4 of the 1972 Act, not the prohibition on creating indictable offences. There is no ambiguity in the statutory language. Therefore, the regulations are not ultra vires and the appeal fails.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; High Court order affirmed.

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed.
  • Order of the High Court affirmed.