Criminal Assets Bureau v. Hunt [2003] IESC 20 (19 March 2003)

Criminal Assets Bureau v. Hunt [2003] IESC 20 (19 March 2003)

The High Court lacked jurisdiction to determine tax liability before assessments became final and conclusive under statutory procedures; evidence relied upon was inadmissible; demand for payment was not made; proceedings should be dismissed.

Citation
[2003] IESC 20
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Criminal Assets Bureau; Defendant/appellant: Sean Hunt; Defendant/appellant: Rosaleen Hunt (nee Maher), also known as Jean Hunt and Jean Maher; Respondent: Anonymous Revenue Official
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
19 March 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court to Supreme Court
Outcome
appeal allowed; High Court order set aside; proceedings dismissed
Legal Topics
Income Tax Recovery, Value Added Tax Recovery, Jurisdiction of High Court, Statutory Interpretation, Admissibility of Evidence, Mareva Injunction, Ultra Vires Actions, Right of Appeal
Tax Law Civil Procedure Constitutional Law Evidence Law Income Tax Recovery Value Added Tax Recovery Jurisdiction of High Court Statutory Interpretation +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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Criminal Assets Bureau

Plaintiff/respondent

Sean Hunt

Defendant/appellant

Rosaleen Hunt (nee Maher), also known as Jean Hunt and Jean Maher

Defendant/appellant

Anonymous Revenue Official

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court to Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court had jurisdiction to determine tax liability before assessments became final and conclusive
  2. 2 Whether proceedings under s.966 of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 may be brought by plenary summons
  3. 3 Whether a prior demand for payment is required before instituting proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court lacked jurisdiction to determine tax liability before assessments became final and conclusive under statutory procedures; evidence relied upon was inadmissible; demand for payment was not made; proceedings should be dismissed.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; High Court order set aside; proceedings dismissed

Orders

  • Order dismissing the Bureau's claim against Mr. Hunt and Mrs. Hunt