314 / 322
GAZETTE
JULY / AUGUST 1984
RATEABLE VALUATION
Section 11 of the Local Government Act,
1946 to the extent that it authorises the
collection of rates on land independently of
buildings is invalid having regard to the
provisions of Article 40.3 of the
Constitution.
The Plaintiffs, farmers in County
Wexford, instituted High Court
proceedings seeking declarations that
certain sections of the Valuation Acts
insofar as they provide for the valuation
for rating purposes of agricultural land
were unconstitutional. Ancillary declara-
tions were sought in relation to other
statutes which depended upon the
rateable valuation system of agricultural
land for the purposes of assessing tax or
other liability or of determining grant or
other entitlements.
After a full hearing in the High Court,
Mr. Justice Barrington granted the
declarations sought including a
declaration that the valuations placed on
the Plaintiffs' own lands were invalid.
Against these orders the Attorney
General appealed to the Supreme Court.
Certain conclusions or findings arising
out of the evidence adduced in the High
Court could not be upset on appeal and
accordingly, were accepted by the
Supreme Court. These conclusions were
as follows:
1. The existing valuation system does
not provide a uniform system for
valuing lands throughout the state.
2. There is no consistency between
county and county or within
counties.
3. The valuation system has failed to
effect changing patterns of
agriculture with the result that land
which modern agriculturalists
would regard as good land often
carries a low valuation, while land
which they would regard as inferior
often carries a higher valuation.
4. The whole system is shot through
with unnecessary anomalies and
inconsistencies.
In the course of the hearing of the
appeal, the Supreme Court by consent
allowed an amendment of the Plaintiffs'
statement of claim to include a claim that
Section 11 of the Local Government Act,
1946 insofar as it provides for the raising
of money by means of the poor rate on
land, independently of buildings, is
invalid having regard to the provisions of
the constitution.
HELD:
1. What is of concern to those whose
property or land has been valued in
an improper manner is the use to
which that valuation is put by the
State or Local Authority and the
extent to which that use affects them
in the enjoyment of their property or
other rights. Accordingly, that
portion of the High Court Order
declaring named sections of the
Valuation Acts invalid is set aside.
2. Section 11 of the Local Government
Act, 1946 is the existing statutory
authority directing the assessment of
liability to local taxation on land by
means of the valuation prepared
under the Valuation Acts.
3. Article 40.1 of the Constitution deals
and deals only with the citizen as a
human person and requires for each
citizen as a human person, equality
before the law citing in support of
this the dictum of Walsh J. in
Quinn's Supermarket
-v-
A. G.
[ 1972]
IR
at p. 13. Because the tax is related
not to the person but to the land
which irrespective of who he may be,
he occupies, Article 40.1 has no
application.
4. Section 11 of the Local Government
Act, 1946 is contrary to the
provisions of Article 40.3 of the
Constitution in so far as it authorises
the collection of rates on land
i ndependen t ly of buildings.
Continuing the use of the valuation
system as a basis for agricultural
rates long after the lack of
uniformity, inconsistencies and
anomalies had been established and,
long after methods of agricultural
production had drastically changed
is in itself an unjust attack on
property rights. The state failed to
protect the property rights of those
adversely affected by the system
from further unjust attack.
Brennan and Others
-v-
Attorney General
and Wexford County Council - Supreme
Court (per O'Higgins C.J. rem. diss.), 20
January, 1984 - unreported.
Joseph B. Mannix
Copies of judgments in the above
cases are available on request from
the Soc i e t y 's L i b r a r y. The
photocopying rate is lOp per page.
(Students — 5p per page.)
XII