Not sure if this is covered on any other thread.
Whats peoples thoughts on this? Are the people who refused to pay and had the €200 taken direct from their pay due this back?
Dermot Murphy
Now this is a Landmark Case.......................... .Household Charge Challenge
Solicitors for Mayo County Council (M.C.C.) today (5/3/15) withdrew charges for non-payment of the 2012 Household Charge against Peter Anthony Keegan, the first man to be charged with the “offence”.
Today’s siting of the Castlebar Circuit Court saw Peter Keegan summonsed by M.C.C. to appear before Judge Mary Devins, to face charges in relation to non payment of the Household Charge.
These charges have seen Peter attending Court many times over the last 2 years, arguing and counterclaiming that the Household Charge is unenforceable due to its unconstitutional nature.
Mr Keegan has challenged the Council and their legal team to prove to the court that the Charge applied to him and to disprove his claims of unconstitutionality, and after two years attending court on multiple occasions the case is finally over.
This morning solicitor Ward McEllin, acting for Mayo County Council (plaintiff), withdrew all charges on his client’s behalf before the case could be heard. Peter Keegan walked out of Castlebar Court, a happy man, accompanied by his family and supporters
McEllin Solicitors stated it was now a matter for Revenue to pursue. However, Revenue likewise would have to succeed where M.C.C. failed, in proving the Charge was constitutional.
Mr Keegan is now protected by the Law, in that he has shown the household charge to be unenforceable, and this has been acknowledged by Judge Devins and the Court Clerk with the withdrawal of charges.
Comment
The imposition of Local Property Tax and its forerunner the Household Charge on a primary residence has long been something DDI has stood against, noting that it was only introduced to fill the gap left when the Department of the Environment vastly reduced Local Government funding to pay off the bondholders and the subsequent bailout costs.
This test case is a potentially huge victory for the people against the government, so you would have thought the media would be all over this, but as yet, despite being informed, they have not covered the story.
As M.C.C. failed to prove the constitutionality of this Household Charge, or prove that it applied to Mr Keegan, this opens the possibility that everyone who paid the charge, generally under duress, should be entitled to a refund of their €100 plus penalties if applied.
Furthermore, those who were bullied, harassed, threatened or frightened into paying the charge may consider seeking redress for damages. We trust also that Mr Keegan will be applying for costs for his 2 years of work and worry.
The group behind the victory may now consider looking at the Local Property Tax with a view to testing its constitutionality in the near future.
Our core group at DDI have always pushed for legal solutions for these injustices, as we do in the water charges and the repossession scandals.
We recall the collapse of the many CAHWT groups after it was taken over by political groupings who later abandoned the cause. Sadly their sizable fund collected for a legal challenge ended up wasted on other activities and the attempted politicising of the cause.
So today’s court victory is a victory for the ordinary people who pursued this when others abandoned ship when it was no longer beneficial to them. It highlights that some groups intentions, methods and agendas can be counter productive to the original worthy cause.
So, congratulations to all involved for showing people that they are not helpless against the State, and that they can use the courts to enforce what is right if they use them correctly.
Whats peoples thoughts on this? Are the people who refused to pay and had the €200 taken direct from their pay due this back?
Dermot Murphy
Now this is a Landmark Case.......................... .Household Charge Challenge
Solicitors for Mayo County Council (M.C.C.) today (5/3/15) withdrew charges for non-payment of the 2012 Household Charge against Peter Anthony Keegan, the first man to be charged with the “offence”.
Today’s siting of the Castlebar Circuit Court saw Peter Keegan summonsed by M.C.C. to appear before Judge Mary Devins, to face charges in relation to non payment of the Household Charge.
These charges have seen Peter attending Court many times over the last 2 years, arguing and counterclaiming that the Household Charge is unenforceable due to its unconstitutional nature.
Mr Keegan has challenged the Council and their legal team to prove to the court that the Charge applied to him and to disprove his claims of unconstitutionality, and after two years attending court on multiple occasions the case is finally over.
This morning solicitor Ward McEllin, acting for Mayo County Council (plaintiff), withdrew all charges on his client’s behalf before the case could be heard. Peter Keegan walked out of Castlebar Court, a happy man, accompanied by his family and supporters
McEllin Solicitors stated it was now a matter for Revenue to pursue. However, Revenue likewise would have to succeed where M.C.C. failed, in proving the Charge was constitutional.
Mr Keegan is now protected by the Law, in that he has shown the household charge to be unenforceable, and this has been acknowledged by Judge Devins and the Court Clerk with the withdrawal of charges.
Comment
The imposition of Local Property Tax and its forerunner the Household Charge on a primary residence has long been something DDI has stood against, noting that it was only introduced to fill the gap left when the Department of the Environment vastly reduced Local Government funding to pay off the bondholders and the subsequent bailout costs.
This test case is a potentially huge victory for the people against the government, so you would have thought the media would be all over this, but as yet, despite being informed, they have not covered the story.
As M.C.C. failed to prove the constitutionality of this Household Charge, or prove that it applied to Mr Keegan, this opens the possibility that everyone who paid the charge, generally under duress, should be entitled to a refund of their €100 plus penalties if applied.
Furthermore, those who were bullied, harassed, threatened or frightened into paying the charge may consider seeking redress for damages. We trust also that Mr Keegan will be applying for costs for his 2 years of work and worry.
The group behind the victory may now consider looking at the Local Property Tax with a view to testing its constitutionality in the near future.
Our core group at DDI have always pushed for legal solutions for these injustices, as we do in the water charges and the repossession scandals.
We recall the collapse of the many CAHWT groups after it was taken over by political groupings who later abandoned the cause. Sadly their sizable fund collected for a legal challenge ended up wasted on other activities and the attempted politicising of the cause.
So today’s court victory is a victory for the ordinary people who pursued this when others abandoned ship when it was no longer beneficial to them. It highlights that some groups intentions, methods and agendas can be counter productive to the original worthy cause.
So, congratulations to all involved for showing people that they are not helpless against the State, and that they can use the courts to enforce what is right if they use them correctly.