Blake v. A.G. [1981] IESC 1; [1982] IR 117; [1981] ILRM 34 (29th June, 1981)

Blake v. A.G. [1981] IESC 1; [1982] IR 117; [1981] ILRM 34 (29th June, 1981)

The Court held that Parts II and IV of the Rent Restrictions Act, 1960 (as amended) constituted an unjust, arbitrary, and unfair attack on the property rights of landlords of controlled dwellings, as the legislation restricted property rights without compensation, review, or regard to the means of landlords or tenants, and was not justified by any social necessity or emergency. The provisions were therefore invalid having regard to Article 40.3.2 of the Constitution.

Citation
[1981] ILRM 34
Parties
Plaintiffs: Dorothy Blake, Bridgid Elizabeth Downes, Eileen McAleese, Nuala Ladd and Patricia Hodgins; Defendant: The Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Challenge (appeal) / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; impugned statutory provisions declared unconstitutional and invalid.
Legal Topics
Rent Control, Property Rights, Unjust Attack on Property, Constitutional Validity, Landlord and Tenant Law
Constitutional Law Property Law Rent Control Property Rights Unjust Attack on Property Constitutional Validity Landlord and Tenant Law

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 2 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dorothy Blake, Bridgid Elizabeth Downes, Eileen McAleese, Nuala Ladd and Patricia Hodgins

Plaintiffs

The Attorney General

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Challenge (appeal) / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Parts II and IV of the Rent Restrictions Act, 1960 (as amended) constitute an unjust attack on property rights contrary to Article 40.3.2 of the Constitution
  2. 2 Whether the statutory scheme for rent control and restrictions on recovery of possession is arbitrary, unfair, and unconstitutional

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that Parts II and IV of the Rent Restrictions Act, 1960 (as amended) constituted an unjust, arbitrary, and unfair attack on the property rights of landlords of controlled dwellings, as the legislation restricted property rights without compensation, review, or regard to the means of landlords or tenants, and was not justified by any social necessity or emergency. The provisions were therefore invalid having regard to Article 40.3.2 of the Constitution.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; impugned statutory provisions declared unconstitutional and invalid.

Orders

  • Declarations granted as to the invalidity of Parts II and IV of the Rent Restrictions Act, 1960 (as amended)