Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 31 May 2016
891. Deputy Niall Collins asked the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation the number of legal actions and proceedings initiated and active against her, her Department and the State; the reason for the actions being undertaken in tabular form; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [12762/16]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe State Claims Agency (SCA) is the delegated authority for handling certain claims against my Department. There are currently 6 legal actions and proceedings ongoing through the SCA against me or my Department and its offices. The following table is a brief summary of these cases, in so far as the timeframe of the Deputy’s request allows.
|
Who was involved |
Incident/Hazard Category |
Total |
|
External contractor |
Exposure to physical hazards |
1 |
|
Member of the public |
Exposure to chemical hazards |
1 |
|
Staff member |
Exposure to physical hazards |
4 |
In seeking to provide the Deputy with the information requested, other than the above-mentioned claims handled by the SCA, the assumption has been made that the question relates to civil proceedings taken against my Department or one of its offices.
There are currently a further 26 legal actions and proceedings, including judicial reviews, ongoing against me or my Department and its offices.
|
Party/Parties involved |
Reason (purpose/detail) for legal actions and proceedings currently initiated and active against the Department or it’s offices |
|
The Plaintiff -v- Registrar of Companies |
The plaintiff objected to the recording of Form E8 (notice of appointment of receiver) against the company with the resulting change in status to "Receivership". It was heard on 11 December 2014, with judgment handed down on 16 January 2015, in favour of the CRO. On 23 January 2015 costs were awarded to the CRO with a stay of 28 days. ITC appealed the decision of the High Court and the appeal was heard in the Court of Appeal on 18 February 2016. Judgement is awaited and expected shortly. |
|
The Plaintiff -v- Registrar of Companies The Plaintiff -v- Registrar of Companies |
These cases are in respect of the same issue as the ITC case above. Proceedings were issued in Summer 2013 and are pending. A plenary summons has issued in both cases with no further steps taken. The relief sought are injunctions and a declaration. |
|
The Plaintiff -v- Loire Valley |
The plaintiff was unsuccessful in March 2013 in his judicial review of the Registrar`s strike off of his company, Loire Valley Limited. Costs were awarded in favour of the Registrar. The case has been appealed to the Supreme Court. |
|
The Plaintiff -v- Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation |
This is a claim by a bulk data customer for alleged breach of contract, in respect of data he maintains he did not receive. Statement of Claim has been filed by the plaintiff and the defence has been filed by CRO. |
|
The Plaintiff -v- Ireland |
Constitutional challenge to section 708 of the Companies Act 2014 and section 62 of the Statute of Limitations Act, 1961. |
|
The Plaintiff -v- Ireland |
Defamation proceedings arising from a report published pursuant to section 14 of Companies Act 1990. |
|
The Plaintiff -v- The Minister for Enterprise Trade and Innovation, Ireland and the Attorney General, Defendants The High Court Record No. 1996/6761P |
A case of defamation was taken against the Minister by Irish Press & others arising out of a press statement made by the then Minister on 26 October 1996. The plaintiffs initiated proceedings in the High Court on 8th November 1996. Their claim is for damages (including exemplary damages) and interest pursuant to the Court Act 1980, costs and any further relied granted by the Court. The Department has actively defended the case. The discovery process has been completed. The decision to initiate Court proceedings rests with the plaintiffs. After this the plaintiffs must get the case listed for a hearing in the High Court. At this stage the Department is not in a position to state when or whether the case will begin nor to indicate the likelihood of success or the possible liabilities arising. |
|
The Plaintiff -v- Employment Appeals Tribunal (EAT) & Dan Foran (notice party) |
Substantive issue settled but costs issue is still outstanding. The costs issue was transferred to the Court of Appeal; a hearing date is pending. |
|
The Plaintiff -v- Employment Appeals Tribunal (EAT) |
Substantive issue settled but costs issue is outstanding. Costs were refused by the High Court and the applicant appealed to the Supreme Court which will hear the costs appeal on 6 July 2016. |
|
The Plaintiff -v- Employment Appeals Tribunal (EAT) |
Case dismissed by the High Court in Sept 2015 but applicant appealed to the Court of Appeal, where a hearing date is pending. |
|
The Plaintiff -v- Employment Appeals Tribunal (EAT) & Anne Marie Cronin (notice party) |
Judicial Review of EAT preliminary decision. |
|
The Plaintiff -v- Employment Appeals Tribunal (EAT), John Walsh Rights Commissioner and Maureen Stewart |
Judicial Review of EAT determination and Rights Commissioner recommendation (WRC dealing separately with latter element). |
|
The Plaintiff -v- Employment Appeals Tribunal (EAT) & Hitianland Limited t/a Foodland Stores & Ireland and the Attorney General & the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission |
Judicial Review of EAT determination. |
|
The Plaintiff -v- Director of the Equality Tribunal |
Appeal of Judicial Review to Supreme Court |
|
The Plaintiff -v- Director of the Equality Tribunal |
Appeal of Judicial Review to Supreme Court |
|
The Plaintiff -v- Director of the Equality Tribunal |
Appeal of Judicial Review to Supreme Court |
|
The Plaintiff -v- Director of the Equality Tribunal |
High Court Plenary Summons |
|
The Plaintiff -v- John Walsh Rights Commissioner |
Judicial Review |
|
The Plaintiff -v- Workplace Relations Commission |
Judicial Review |
|
The Plaintiff -v- The Labour Court |
Judicial Review |
|
The Plaintiff -v- The Labour Court & Clare County Council |
Judicial Review |
|
The Plaintiff -v- Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Ireland and the Attorney General |
Article 7 of the Working Time Directive 2003/88/EC (Schultz Hoff case on accrual of annual leave while on sick leave). |
|
The Plaintiff -v- Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation |
Refusal of employment permit |
|
The Plaintiff -v- Controller of Patents Designs and Trademarks and Donncha Haverty |
Appeal against the decision of the Controller in relation to a Patent |
|
The Plaintiff -v- Controller of Patents Designs and Trademarks |
Appeal against the decision of the Controller in relation to a Trade Mark |
|
The Plaintiff -v- Controller of Patents Designs and Trademarks |
Appeal against the Decision of the Controller in relation to a Trade Mark |
