wtf is going on? Bizzarre
This is where your logic falls down. She was not "engaged or employed" by a business or occupation that was "dealing in or developing land"
Ok, as you understand it, what was she doing when she instructed her solicitor to contact the council to express an interest in purchasing the land in order to develop a medical centre?
I think it's fair to say you wouldn't describe it as practicing medicine, so how would you describe it?
I suspect they are not the only one. It is potentially something of a failing in legal language, but it has specific meanings separate from colloquial meanings.
She's a doctor, not a realtor. You said so yourself. She is licensed as the former, not the latter. The statute doesn't apply to her.
Again, if NC is stupid enough to use that as an argument in his defence I'll believe he was stupid enough not to realise he needed to disclose his wife's interest.
"Nothing to see here, my wife's a doctor, any of her property dealings is unlisted, just a bit on the side, off the books as it were, all perfectly normal FF fare, sure Bertie didn't even have a bank account and he was Minister for Finance"
I suspect hometruths cannot distinguish between an expression of interest in, and a beneficial interest in, a property.
Do you think the other people who wrote to the council also had a defined beneficial interest in the property?
If they were connected persons of councillors in the meeting in which decided to sell the land then absolutely.
A beneficial interest is not dependent on who you are or who you are married to.
Do these actions relate "to dealing in or developing land" - YES
There was no engagement or employment to this effect. Both of these things require some form of legal contract.
you are welcome to think it stinks, that is your right. He may face political ramifications in the next election. But its absolutely not illegal.
Describe what part of the profession of being a doctor makes a doctor a land developer/dealer?
At the time of the meeting she had not even bid on the land.
At the time of the meeting there was no guarantee that Collin’s wife would be the buyer, so how could he possibly have a declarable beneficial interest in it?
He had a declarable beneficial interest because that's what the Local Government Act 2001 states he had, and he is bound by that act. I've explained this above.
To repeat:
I get that you think his wife's plans to build a medical centre and interest in acquiring the land from council do not relate to dealing in or developing land.
In which case your interpretation is that NC was under no obligation to disclose that his wife was one of the interested parties whose enquiries prompted the discussion and decision to sell the land that his wife ultimately bought.
And you're fine with that. Good for you.
I think it stinks though.
So once again, just like other posters, hometruths is not able to show any pecuniary or beneficial interest by Niall Collins to warrant a disclosure under the planning act, and therefore nothing to suggest illegal activity .
His only conclusion is that Collins should have, in hindsight, recused himself. Something that everyone agrees with.
What I find hilarious about so many grasping for straws here is that Collins actually did something completely unethical (and possibly illegal) in his planning application for his house, if it is shown that he lied on his application form about already owning a house. An incident I believe which has been alerted to the gardai.
They should be focusing on that.
Correct, no, neither did Dr O’Connor, nor indeed Niall Collins, which begs the question, why do you keep insisting they did, declarable or otherwise? Do you think the other people who wrote to the council also had a defined beneficial interest in the property?
It is nonsense to suggest that if you bid on a property that you would gain financially from its sale to anyone else. At the time of the meeting there was no guarantee that Collin’s wife would be the buyer, so how could he possibly have a declarable beneficial interest in it?
No. And neither would Dr O'Connor.
Unless of course the house was owned by the council, not on the open market, Dr O'Connor's bid was unsolicited, and the matter of whether or not to sell the house arose at a council meeting in which her husband was present and subject to the Local Government Act 2001.
In those circumstances the interest would be declarable, and he'd have to recuse himself.
No idea, doctor I suspect.
If you view a house in Saturday and bid on it, would you then own a beneficial interest in that house?
Tell me, what is her listed profession? What business or occupational licenses does she operate under?
Great, if questioned Niall Collins can simply argue that in planning to build a medical centre, looking for for sites, and instructing solicitors to contact the owners of sites expressing an interest to purchase, his wife was not engaged in the business of property development, nor any other business which relates to dealing in or developing land.
Will look forward to seeing how that flies.
I doubt he'll get the chance to make the argument as his bosses might take the view that's not a good look.
sigh..... here we go again... its very hard to educate pork.
175.—Each of the following interests is a declarable interest for the purposes of this Part:
(a) any profession, business or occupation in which the person concerned is engaged or employed, whether on his or her own behalf or otherwise, and which relates to dealing in or developing land during the appropriate period;
was Niall Collins (or Emer O Connor if you want to stretch it that far) engaged or employed by any profession or business to deal with or develop the lands?
No? because thats what this section refers to.
i find it amazing that people see words written straight in front of them, but have absolutely no understating of what they actually say, or refer to.
Apparently anyone who views/bids on a property now has a beneficial interest in dealing/developing it, I wonder can I sell my interest in the house I looked at a couple of months ago?
She was not engaged or employed in dealing in or developing land.
An intention to attempt to do something does not constitute being engaged in something.
Defined in "Beneficial Interests - Section 176":
176 (2): A person shall also be deemed to have a beneficial interest which has to be disclosed under this Part if he or she has actual knowledge that he or she or a connected person has a declarable interest (within the meaning of section 175) in, or which is material to, a resolution, motion, question or other matter which is proposed, or otherwise arises from or as regards the performance by the authority of any of its functions under this or any other enactment.
Within the meaning of Section 175:
If he wishes to argue otherwise he has to explain how the answers to any of the above questions are NO.
It is not immediately clear to me how he can manage that. No wonder he is so reluctant to answer questions on the matter.
What is a defined beneficial interest, as you understand it?
ah jaysus, we're not going through ALL this again !!!
read the thread if you want to get informed.
very rich of you to accuse me of misunderstanding when you clearly havent a scooby.....
Have you actually read anything relating to how a beneficial interest is defined?
Or are you just relying on your own mis/understanding?
nope
again, if you could actually understand the section that you are trying to quote you would see that:
177.—(1) Where at a meeting of a local authority or of any committee, joint committee or joint body of a local authority, a resolution, motion, question or other matter is proposed or otherwise arises either—
(a) as a result of any of its functions under this or any other enactment, or
(b) as regards the performance by the authority, committee, joint committee or joint body of any of its functions under this or any other enactment,
then, a member of the authority, committee, joint committee or joint body present at such meeting shall, where he or she has actual knowledge that he or she or a connected person has a pecuniary or other beneficial interest in, or which is material to, the matter—
(i) disclose the nature of his or her interest, or the fact of a connected person's interest at the meeting, and before discussion or consideration of the matter commences, and
(ii) withdraw from the meeting for so long as the matter is being discussed or considered,
and, accordingly, he or she shall take no part in the discussion or consideration of the matter and shall refrain from voting in relation to it.
i've bolded the bits you dont seem to understand.
@hometruths what "pecuniary or beneficial interest" did Niall Collins or Dr O Connor have in the site at the time of that Bruff Local Area meeting??
yes they are
If the above actions of Dr O'Connor relate to dealing in or developing land then she had an interest which required NC to make a disclosure under subsection 1.
The question is did she have an interest which required NC to make a disclosure under subsection 1.
Try again but with chat GPT?
Ok, fair enough. I'll be more specific to the matter we are discussing.
Dr O'Connor plans to build a medical centre, and she identifies a suitable site for the centre, but it is not for sale. She finds out who owns it, then instructs her solicitor to contact the owners expressing an interest in purchasing the site in order to build a medical centre.
Do the above actions of Dr O'Connor relate to dealing in or developing land?
On 15 December 2006, Limerick solicitor Patricia O'Connor wrote to Limerick County Council's Department of Housing to express an interest in a specific site on Main Street in Patrickswell.
Ms O'Connor said she was writing on behalf of "a client", whose name has been redacted in FOI documents.
She said her client "wishes to provide a centre in Patrickswell to provide a service" - the details of which have also been redacted - and asked the council to explain how the land could be purchased as at that time it was in public ownership.
Council agrees to put the site on the market
A few weeks later, on 15 January 2007, the issue was raised at Limerick County Council's Bruff electoral area committee meeting.
The meeting minutes of that meeting show councillors were told there had been "a number of enquiries to purchase a parcel of land at Main Street in Patrickswell".
And they were also told the site was three quarters of an acre and had "very limited use as an open space".
As such, it was agreed by the Bruff electoral area committee to place the site "on the open market" and that officials would update "the meeting again for further consideration".
That 15 January 2007 meeting was attended by seven councillors, including Mr Collins.
Mr Collins did not table the motion or second it.
The meeting minutes are unclear if a formal vote took place, but no objections were raised to the decision.
What happened to the property in 2007
Files released today by Limerick County Council show the Patrickswell site was advertised for sale twice in the Limerick Leader in January and February 2007.
RTE have seen the minutes.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wa.vanillicon.com/v2/a46418388544fe9f8f6352b57fb2f921.svg)
