Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Did ya hear about this?

Comments

  • #2
    Tallon
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,569 ✭✭✭✭Tallon


    Excuse my ignorance, but how does Treaty of Rome apply to Irish Law?


  • #3
    MagicMarker
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    Tallon wrote: »
    Excuse my ignorance, but how does Treaty of Rome apply to Irish Law?
    EU Law applies to Irish Law.


  • #4
    axeox
    Registered Users Posts: 9 ✭axeox


    Well apart from joining the EEC in 1973. The Lisbon Treaty of 2009 actually puts E.U. ahead of Irish law so if the two have conflicting views on something then we have to go with Europe's


  • #5
    MugMugs
    Registered Users Posts: 17,875 ✭✭✭✭MugMugs


    This is a good step. Wonder if we'll all get refunds. :D


  • #6
    slimjimmc
    Registered Users Posts: 7,787 ✭✭✭slimjimmc


    axeox wrote: »
    Basically a lad named John Doherty from Donegal used E.U. law (namely Article 25 and 39 of the Treaty of Rome among other things) to avoid paying VRT and also to show that VRT is illegal. I'd always known about the principals of free movement of goods etc between E.U. member countries but it's a blessing to any petrol head to see it in practice. Now that a precedent has been set let the fun begin!


    http://www.donegaldaily.com/2012/07/17/fire-your-solicitor-call-from-donegal-man-who-won-vrt-case/

    http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/emu_history/documents/treaties/rometreaty2.pdf

    I wouldn't get all excited yet. :(
    Unfortunately I don't see anything in that article that shows VRT is illegal, it just says that Judge Kevin Kilraine previously ruled that the seizure was against the treaty. That seems to be a criticism of the enforcement procedures rather than the tax itself.
    He ruled that the seizure breached Article 25 of the Treaty of Rome Act (free movement of products within the Union). When the car was taken, they also denied him the right of due process, as he was not convicted of any crime yet his car was taken from him
    One should also note that Judge Kevin Kilraine is a District Court judge which is probably the lowest court in the land (the small claims court operates in the DC) and therefore cannot set precedent. His rulings could be overruled by higher courts.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    AltAccount
    Registered Users Posts: 2,058 ✭✭✭AltAccount


    I wish there was more details in that article, or that a more reputable news source reported on it.

    I wonder why they haven't...


  • #8
    axeox
    Registered Users Posts: 9 ✭axeox


    slimjimmc wrote: »
    I wouldn't get all excited yet. :(
    Unfortunately I don't see anything in that article that shows VRT is illegal, it just says that Judge Kevin Kilraine previously ruled that the seizure was against the treaty. That seems to be a criticism of the enforcement procedures rather than the tax itself.

    One should also note that Judge Kevin Kilraine is a District Court judge which is probably the lowest court in the land (the small claims court operates in the DC) and therefore cannot set precedent. His rulings could be overruled by higher courts.

    Fair point but it's a strong start at least. Yeah the DC is the lowest court in the land and can only set precedent for other DC's. Hopefully something will get to the Circuit Court or even the High Court that will set a stronger one. If for instance one of them decide to take a case against the state for the wrongful seizure of their car.


  • #9
    Marcusm
    Registered Users Posts: 10,183 ✭✭✭✭Marcusm


    Given that this was a Donegal case, it would not be surprising if it dealt with someone who had ties both in the UK and Ireland and might be due to the exercise of free movement or employment rights. Perhaps he lives in one jurisdiction and works in the other. I don't see anything in the report (which is sketchy in the extreme) which necessarily rules VRT to be illegal. Other countries (incl I think the netherlands) have similar taxes. If there are any possibilities with respect to further reductions or eliminations of VRT, I suspect it will be to do with cross border cases.

    For example, I live in London but have property in Ireland which I live in at least 1 week per month. Sometimes I leave a car in Ireland of extended periods. Technically I cannot import one of my cars into Ireland without paying VRT unless I'm changing residence permanently. That might be an undue restriction on my freedom of movement and freedom of establishment.


  • #10
    Henry Ford III
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 17,617 Mod ✭✭✭✭Henry Ford III


    axeox wrote: »
    ...Yeah the DC is the lowest court in the land and can only set precedent for other DC's.......

    Are you sure that's correct?


  • #11
    Tefral
    Registered Users Posts: 4,313 ✭✭✭Tefral


    Henry Ford III wrote: »
    Are you sure that's correct?

    Ya thats correct.. a higher court can overturn a precedent made by a lower court.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    Henry Ford III
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 17,617 Mod ✭✭✭✭Henry Ford III


    cronin_j wrote: »
    Ya thats correct.. a higher court can overturn a precedent made by a lower court.

    Yes but I'm not sure precedent is set by any DC decision.


  • #13
    blindside88
    Registered Users Posts: 1,968 ✭✭✭blindside88


    Henry Ford III wrote: »
    cronin_j wrote: »
    Ya thats correct.. a higher court can overturn a precedent made by a lower court.

    Yes but I'm not sure precedent is set by any DC decision.


    Afaik the dc can't set precedent


  • #14
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,600 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    axeox wrote: »
    Basically a lad named John Doherty from Donegal used E.U. law (namely Article 25 and 39 of the Treaty of Rome among other things) to avoid paying VRT and also to show that VRT is illegal. I'd always known about the principals of free movement of goods etc between E.U. member countries but it's a blessing to any petrol head to see it in practice. Now that a precedent has been set let the fun begin!


    http://www.donegaldaily.com/2012/07/17/fire-your-solicitor-call-from-donegal-man-who-won-vrt-case/

    http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/emu_history/documents/treaties/rometreaty2.pdf

    That website is about as reliable as the drunken witterings of a tramp.


  • #15
    Where To
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,455 ✭✭✭Where To


    I notice he doesn't specify what three charges were struck out, more smoke and mirrors from the anti-VRT brigade.

    The Donegal Daily is quite possibly the most unreliable, sensationalist and downright idiotic site on the interweb, in my opinion of course. Just posting a link to it on the Donegal forum here is a bannable offence. :pac:


  • #16
    Marcusm
    Registered Users Posts: 10,183 ✭✭✭✭Marcusm


    blindside88 wrote: »
    Afaik the dc can't set precedent

    You are correct, while the DC remains the lowest court in the land (ie no tribunals whose appeals are heard in the DC), other DJs are not even bound by decisions of their brethren.


  • #17
    axeox
    Registered Users Posts: 9 ✭axeox


    Ah right thanks for the info. Still though the case does raise good points about Treatys being adhered to. If quotas on produce and such as so strictly enforced then why aren't we able to get the benifits of the Union?
    In America (which I know has a much more connected Federal Gov) you can buy a car from anywhere and bring it to any other part. So either way it seems like it's only a matter of time before VRT is gone from imports within the EU.


  • #18
    guerito
    Registered Users Posts: 285 ✭✭guerito


    Not gonna happen any time soon. It's not illegal (against the spirit of free movement of goods yes, in violation of the letter of the law no). But how in the name of jaysus is the Troika ever going to agree to the government getting rid of a substantial source of income like VRT, especially with motor tax revenues down?


  • #19
    Cuddlesworth
    Registered Users Posts: 13,980 ✭✭✭✭Cuddlesworth


    This again.

    VRT doesn't affect movement of goods, you can happily buy thousands of cars and import them into and out of Ireland. But if you want to drive the car on public roads as a resident of this country, you have to register the car and pay the VRT. It restricts you driving the car, not purchasing or moving it.


  • #20
    milltown
    Registered Users Posts: 4,613 ✭✭✭milltown


    That article says feck all.

    Fixed penalties don't rob you of your right to a fair trial. You have the option of paying the fine OR going to court, so I don't see how that needed to be ruled on. Otherwise, he seems to have got some minor charges overturned by quoting some impressive sounding legal documents.

    Nowhere does it say that he has now registered his car in the republic without paying any VRT, or will at any point in the future.

    If these particular charges are dropped now, and not appealed to a higher court, he'll be back in court soon enough on the same or similar charges brought by a Garda who is just doing the job he was told to do.


Advertisement