Doctrine of Implied Repeal in Ireland

GGTrek

I have found plenty of references to this doctrine in British case law, but almost nothing in Irish case law.
This is a nice definition that I have found online: sometimes the laws made by the legislature come into conflict among itself. When two statutes come into conflict and neither of the statute is more specific than other then the later enacted statute supervises another. The later enacted statute repeals the former and this principle is called as implied repeal. Of course constitutional law can only be repealed by other more recent constitutional law.

Now, the Irish Dáil is rushing some new RTA legislation through (as usual without proper consideration of previous statutes or its unintended consequences) that contradicts previous legislation, in particular this is the proposal: http://www.oireachtas.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=37597&&CatID=59
And this is the section contradicting previous statute:
Section 66 of  the Principal  Act   (as amended  by section 31 of  the  Residential Tenancies (Amendment) Act 2015) is amended by substituting the following Table for
Table 1: “Table 1 Termination by Landlord
Duration of Tenancy    Notice Period
Less than 6 months      90 days

Which contradicts Section 65(4) of the original RTA 2004:
65.—(1) This Chapter states the period of notice to be given by a notice of termination.
(4) If the duration of the tenancy concerned is less than 6 months, a period of notice of more than 70 days may not be given in respect of it.

If the doctrine of implied repeal is strictly applied, then Section 65(4) would become repealed and all new periods of notice would become of at least 90 days.

Is my understanding correct? Or the judges would take a different interpretation doctrine in such case?

Also the RTB adjudicators should be responsible to interpret such new contradicting statute, but the final say would belong to the Court of Appeal. Correct?

GM228

In Ireland sovereignty is vested in the Irish people, as such the doctrine of implied repeal is incompatible with the Irish Constitution as the doctrine goes hand in hand with parliamentary sovereignty as in the UK.

GGTrek

GM228 wrote: »

In Ireland sovereignty is vested in the Irish people, as such the doctrine of implied repeal is incompatible with the Irish Constitution as the doctrine goes hand in hand with parliamentary sovereignty as in the UK.

Thank you very much. However now I am back to square one in my doubts
What other doctrine would the Irish judiciary use to resolve contradictions in statute like the one I showed above? Where a new statute conflicts with an old statute and the legislature does not expressely solve such conflict for example by determining in the new statute that Section 65(4) is repealed.

johnnyskeleton

GGTrek wrote: »

Now, the Irish Dáil is rushing some new RTA legislation through (as usual without proper consideration of previous statutes or its unintended consequences) that contradicts previous legislation, in particular this is the proposal

On the specifics, this is a private members bill from Catherine Murphy and Roisin Shortall. Its purpose isnt to actually amend the law but to be defeated in the dail so that they can go around telling tenants that they tabled a bill to increase their rights but it was shot down by the evil government.

So it pobably hasnt been checked thoroughly before publication and wont get a full and detailed airing in the dail. One would hope that a government sponsored bill or even a major opposition bill would be subjected to a bit more scrutiny and the opinion of the RTB would be sought, but if this were to pass it would be a contraditory section.

On implied repeal, im not sure that would work when the contradictory provision is in the same act, but it might.

More generally, where a statute is contradictory so as to become unworkable on the ordinary meaning, the courts look to the intention of the Oireachtas. I would hazard a guess that if this law was passed and the issue of the contradiction came before the HC, they would resolve it by saying that the minimum notice of 90 days applies notwithstanding the maximum notice of 70 on the basis that that was the intention of the oireachtas. Whether that is done on the basis of implied repeal or just ordinary interpretation rules is hard to say.

GGTrek

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

GGTrek wrote: »

Now, the Irish Dáil is rushing some new RTA legislation through (as usual without proper consideration of previous statutes or its unintended consequences) that contradicts previous legislation, in particular this is the proposal

On the specifics, this is a private members bill from Catherine Murphy and Roisin Shortall. Its purpose isnt to actually amend the law but to be defeated in the dail so that they can go around telling tenants that they tabled a bill to increase their rights but it was shot down by the evil government.

So it pobably hasnt been checked thoroughly before publication and wont get a full and detailed airing in the dail. One would hope that a government sponsored bill or even a major opposition bill would be subjected to a bit more scrutiny and the opinion of the RTB would be sought, but if this were to pass it would be a contraditory section.

On implied repeal, im not sure that would work when the contradictory provision is in the same act, but it might.

More generally, where a statute is contradictory so as to become unworkable on the ordinary meaning, the courts look to the intention of the Oireachtas. I would hazard a guess that if this law was passed and the issue of the contradiction came before the HC, they would resolve it by saying that the minimum notice of 90 days applies notwithstanding the maximum notice of 70 on the basis that that was the intention of the oireachtas. Whether that is done on the basis of implied repeal or just ordinary interpretation rules is hard to say.

Again thank you very much, I only disagree on one point: the bill will be passed for sure since the government does not oppose the bill.

Below the debate on the proposal.

Introduction by the named TD: http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018011700019?opendocument#R01100

Actual debate of the "learned" [img]https://static.boards.ie/b//assets/img/sceditor/emoticons/grin.png?v= 306441d542a77b26498a7b4acfeda686[/img] TDs:  http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018012300046?opendocument#TT00300

Please be aware in the first link about the all important Minister comment:
An Ceann Comhairle:   Is the Bill opposed?
Minister for Housing, Planning and Local Government (Deputy Eoghan Murphy):   No.

This means that sooner or later this bill will most likely amend the current law (it has already reached second stage). One has to hope that the "learned" TDs  will see this contradiction before voting this bill through or they will cause an enormous mess with their amateurish approach to legislation.

johnnyskeleton

GGTrek wrote: »

Again thank you very much, I only disagree on one point: the bill will be passed for sure since the government does not oppose the bill.

Below the debate on the proposal.

Introduction by the named TD: http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018011700019?opendocument#R01100

Actual debate of the "learned" [img]https://static.boards.ie/b//assets/img/sceditor/emoticons/grin.png?v= 306441d542a77b26498a7b4acfeda686[/img] TDs:  http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018012300046?opendocument#TT00300

Please be aware in the first link about the all important Minister comment:
An Ceann Comhairle:   Is the Bill opposed?
Minister for Housing, Planning and Local Government (Deputy Eoghan Murphy):   No.

This means that sooner or later this bill will most likely amend the current law (it has already reached second stage). One has to hope that the "learned" TDs  will see this contradiction before voting this bill through or they will cause an enormous mess with their amateurish approach to legislation.

Ah ok. Crikey. I suppose some civic minded person could contact their local TD about it!

Really Interested

GGTrek wrote: »

Again thank you very much, I only disagree on one point: the bill will be passed for sure since the government does not oppose the bill.

Below the debate on the proposal.

Introduction by the named TD: http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018011700019?opendocument#R01100

Actual debate of the "learned" [img]https://static.boards.ie/b//assets/img/sceditor/emoticons/grin.png?v= 306441d542a77b26498a7b4acfeda686[/img] TDs:  http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018012300046?opendocument#TT00300

Please be aware in the first link about the all important Minister comment:
An Ceann Comhairle:   Is the Bill opposed?
Minister for Housing, Planning and Local Government (Deputy Eoghan Murphy):   No.

This means that sooner or later this bill will most likely amend the current law (it has already reached second stage). One has to hope that the "learned" TDs  will see this contradiction before voting this bill through or they will cause an enormous mess with their amateurish approach to legislation.

https://www.oireachtas.ie/viewdoc.asp?fn=/documents/bills28/guide.htm

The bill has not gone through the committee stage where errors will or should be spotted.

The Dail is full of dead bills that have gone to second stage.