‘Livelihoods are at stake': High Court to decide this week on lifting of Skellig Michael boats suspension
A High Court judge has said he will decide this week whether or not to lift a suspension on boating permits needed to ferry people to and from Skellig Michael, saying 'people's livelihoods are at stake'.
The permits have not been issued while legal proceedings are before the courts in the form of a judicial review of the tendering process.
At the High Court on Tuesday, Mr Justice Garrett Simons said he was 'staggered' by the assertion by lawyers for the Office of Public Works (OPW) that it would need six months to prepare the case.
He ordered the case would be heard next month and would get 'top priority'.
READ MORE
The granting of permits to successful applicants is on hold pending a judicial review taken against the OPW by two companies who were unsuccessful in their applications to the government body for the 2025 season, which runs from May to the end of September.
The OPW had run a competition in late 2024 to award 15 boating permits for summer 2025 to serve the Co Kerry island, which was chosen as a film location for the
Star Wars
movies The Force Awakens and The Last Jedi.
The OPW has said that under Irish and EU law it was precluded from issuing permits for the 2025 summer season until legal proceedings were resolved.
Skellig Michael Boat Trips and Atlantic Endeavour Limited both dispute the process underpinning the granting of the licences, alleging it to be 'deficient' and 'without transparency'. They have been granted permission for the challenge.
David Dodd, for the plaintiffs, told Mr Justice Simons nobody wanted the boats not to visit the island.
He said permits could be granted by the court in an interim fashion and the issuing of a one-season permit was not a 'contract' as contended by the OPW.
Mr Dodd said he was resisting a suggested 'five-year framework' on the OPW's granting of the permits as part of a contract, but the plaintiffs also wanted to see the boats out.
He said the OPW in applying to the court to have the suspension lifted had referred to a 'contract' having to be in place for the boats to take to sea.
There should be no such 'contract' and permits issued were akin to planning permission or a gun permit being granted, neither or which, he said, were 'contracts' nor necessitated frameworks.
A permit is a statutory one without an offer or an acceptance as found in a contract, he said. Whether or not this granting amounted to a 'contract' was a matter for the full hearing of the main case, Mr Dodd said.
'We are happy, however, for the suspension to be lifted,' he said.
Mr Justice Simons asked Andrew Beck SC, for the OPW, how it was looking for six months to prepare for this 'most straightforward case of competition for licences'.
Mr Beck said there was discovery of documents needed, amendments to make and a possible issue around cross-examination.
The judge said he was 'staggered' the case would take up to six months to get on.
Mr Justice Simons said he would rule on Thursday whether or not he would lift the suspension of the permits. He adjourned the main hearing to July 21st.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
21 minutes ago
- Irish Times
Corporate tax receipts drop 30% as Trump's tariffs bite
Corporate tax receipts fell by 30 per cent in May, amounting to a loss of over €1.1 billion when compared to the same month last year, amid signs US tariffs may be denting the profitability of multinationals in Ireland. The latest exchequer returns for May, published by the Department of Finance, indicated that the Government collected just under €2.5 billion in corporate taxes last month, compared to almost €3.6 billion in May last year. The department insisted, however, that 'once-off factors' had boosted receipts in May last year which distorted the year-on-year comparison. Nonetheless with most EU exports currently facing a 10 per cent levy in the US, possibly rising to 50 per cent if negotiations between Brussels and Washington fail, exporting companies here may be predicting lower earnings READ MORE [ Subscriber Only Opinion Ireland cannot base its economic strategy on the 'Taco' theory – Trump Always Chickens Out Opens in new window ] On a cumulative basis, receipts from the business tax were up by €1.1 billion at €7.4 billion but this reflects once-off revenues from the EU court ruling against Apple. When they are removed, corporate tax receipts to the end of May were down 9.4 per cent at €5.7 billion. Minister for Finance Paschal Donohoe said: ' May is one of the more important months for tax revenues, and the steady growth in most tax headings points to an economy that is in a relatively good position." 'The most notable feature of the May exchequer returns was in respect of corporation tax, which saw a marked year-on-year drop,' he said. 'While this reflects once-off factors last year, it nonetheless highlights the degree of concentration in the corporate tax base, wherein a small number of multinational firms can significantly impact on the overall tax yield,' Mr Donohoe said. 'In a context of unprecedented uncertainty in the international economic landscape, this serves as a timely reminder of Ireland's exposure to changes in the global trading environment, and of the vital importance of adhering to a sensible and sustainable budgetary strategy,' he said. Overall the latest exchequer data show the Government collected €38.2 billion in tax revenue during the first five months of the year. This was up nearly €3 billion or 8.5 per cent on the same period last year aided by positive increases in income tax and VAT. Income tax receipts, the Government's largest tax channel, generated €14.5 billion, €630 million more than last year, reflecting the State's strong labour market. Separate figures, published on Thursday, put the headline rate of unemployment near a historic low of 4 per cent. VAT receipts for the year so far were also up by €600 million at €11.4 billion. The sales tax reflects consumer activity. On the spending side, total gross voted expenditure for the five-month period amounted to just under €42 billion, up by €3.1 billion (8.1 per cent) on last year and €37 million (0.1 per cent) behind profile. At a headline level, an exchequer surplus of €4 billion was recorded compared to a surplus of €0.8 billion last year, an improvement of €3.2 billion. Excluding the once-off receipts arising from the Apple tax case, the underlying surplus was €0.7 billion.
The Journal
23 minutes ago
- The Journal
Hungary's infamous ban on LGBTQ+ content deemed to be violation of EU law
A HUNGARIAN LAW that harshly restricts access to LGBTQ-related content is a violation of European Union law, according to the Advocate General of the EU's Court of Justice. By banning content about LGBTQ+ sexualities and gender identities from being available to under-18s, Hungary is infringing on the treaty that sets out the EU's fundamental principles, the Advocate General's formal legal opinion stated. The Treaty of the European Union outlines that the EU is 'founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities'. By calling into question the equality of LGBTQ+ people, Hungary has 'negated' several of the EU's fundamental values, Advocate General Tamara Ćapeta said. It has also 'significantly deviated from the model of a constitutional democracy'. In 2021, Hungary's parliament passed a bill that effectively banned communicating with children and teenagers about sexual orientations and gender identities . The impacts affected education programmes, meaning students could not be educated about LGBTQ+ identities, and media like books and movies, including movies that depict LGBTQ+ being classified as 18+. The European Commission brought an infringement action before the Court of Justice against Hungary over the law and Ćapeta has now set out her legal opinion that the Court rule the action is well-founded. She said the legislation infringed on the freedom enshrined in EU law to provide and receive services. Advertisement It also interferes with fundamental rights protected by the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, namely the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of sex and sexual orientation; respect for private and family life; freedom of expression and information; and the right to human dignity. Capéta said these interferences cannot be justified by the reasons put forward by Hungary, which tried to argue for the law on the basis of protection of the 'healthy development of minors' and the 'right of parents to raise their children according to their personal convictions'. The Advocate General said the Hungarian legislation is not limited to shielding minors from pornographic content, which was already prohibited by the law in Hungary prior to the 2021 legislation, and goes as far as prohibiting the portrayal of ordinary lives of LGBTQ+ people. She said that Hungary has not offered any proof of a potential risk of harm of content that portrays ordinary lives of LGBTQ+ people to the healthy development of minors and that consequently, its legislation is 'based on a value judgment that homosexual and non-cisgender life is not of equal value or status as heterosexual and cisgender life'. The EU legal system recognises that there can be different visions among member states about how common values should be implemented in practice, and that disagreements about fundamental rights should not result in a finding of an infringement of the Treaty of the European Union. However, Hungary's actions in this case are not a matter of a 'disagreement', Capéta said. She said that LGBTQ+ people being deserving of equal respect in member states is 'not open to contestation through dialogue'. She said: Disrespect and marginalisation of a group in a society are the 'red lines' imposed by the values of equality, human dignity and respect for human rights. As such, 'by calling into question the equality of LGBTI persons, Hungary is not demonstrating a disagreement or a divergence about the content of the values of the European Union'. 'Instead, that Member State has negated several of those fundamental values and, thus, has significantly deviated from the model of a constitutional democracy, reflected in Article 2 of the Treaty of the European Union.' An Advocate General's opinion is not binding on the Court of Justice but gives the Court a proposed legal solution to cases it is responsible for. Related Reads 'Weeping for this country': Struggle continues in Hungary as Ireland joins Europe in stance against anti-LGBT+ bill The judges of the court are now beginning deliberations on the case. If the Court of Justice finds a member state has failed to fulfil obligations of EU law, the the country must comply with the Court's judgment 'without delay' or face further action like financial penalties. 'No place in the EU' Dávid Vig, director of Amnesty International Hungary, said the Advocate General's opinion 'made it clear the [anti-LGBTQ+] law has no place in Hungary and the European Union'. 'The discriminatory law violates several human rights and promotes the idea that the life of LGBTI people is not of equal value,' Vig said. In March of this year, the Hungarian parliament passed legislation that restricts freedom of assembly and consequently prohibited LGBTQ+ Pride marches . LGBTQ+ rights organisation ILGA-Europe said the today's opinion from the Advocate General should mean the anti-Pride legislation is also considered to be violating EU law. 'The AG's opinion is very clear in that Hungary breaches EU law and the Treaties by enacting the anti-LGBTI legislation from 2021,' said ILGA-Europe's advocacy director Katrin Hugendubel. 'The new package of amendments adopted this year to criminalise Pride marches and their organisers builds directly on that unlawful legislation and must therefore also be considered a violation of EU law.' Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone... A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article. Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation. Learn More Support The Journal
Irish Times
36 minutes ago
- Irish Times
Suspended solicitor's appeal over professional misconduct finding to be heard in July
A date has been fixed next month for an appeal by suspended solicitor Declan O'Callaghan over findings of professional misconduct in connection with his handling of a land deal in Co Mayo. On Friday, the president of the High Court, Mr Justice David Barniville, set a provisional hearing date of July 23rd for the appeal. Barrister Michael Mullooly, for Mr O'Callaghan, said he expected it to run for two days and Mr O'Callaghan would be among his side's witnesses. Barrister Ruadhán Ó Ciaráin, for Nirvanna, the concrete products manufacturer that brought the complaint against Mr O'Callaghan over the 2007 land deal to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, said it is expected to call two witnesses at most. READ MORE Last month, Mr Justice Barniville rejected a challenge by Mr O'Callaghan over the procedures adopted by the tribunal in reaching its findings last year of professional misconduct over the 2007 deal. On Friday, he made an order requiring Mr O'Callaghan to pay Nirvanna's costs in opposing that application. The rejection of Mr O'Callaghan's judicial review-type challenge cleared the way for the hearing of his full appeal. If he loses that appeal, the High Court will then consider whether or not to grant an application by the Law Society to strike him off. The society has agreed with the tribunal recommendation that Mr O'Callaghan be struck off, but the final decision on whether or not to grant a strike-off order must be made by the High Court president. The three-member tribunal last summer found Mr O'Callaghan guilty of four counts of professional misconduct over his handling of the 2007 land deal involving Nirvanna, a company of Co Mayo businessman Tom Fleming. [ Declan O'Callaghan: No end in sight as saga of suspended solicitor continues Opens in new window ] Now aged 80, Mr Fleming claimed Nirvanna never received €250,000 for selling the land to a now-deceased businessman. Mr O'Callaghan denied the sum was owed, and disputed the transaction was for 'sale' of the lands. The tribunal upheld the Nirvanna complaint, finding professional misconduct on grounds Mr O'Callaghan breached his duty of care to the company, provided inadequate professional services, and purported to act for vendor and purchaser in a transaction where there was 'a clear conflict of interest'. In recommending strike-off, it had regard to two findings of professional misconduct previously made by it in 1990 and 2019 against Mr O'Callaghan. He has been suspended as a solicitor since 2018 arising from a separate Law Society investigation into matters at his now-defunct practice Kilrane O'Callaghan & Co, which was based in Ballaghaderreen, Co Roscommon. The suspension was imposed pending a tribunal hearing of the society's application for an inquiry into matters arising from its investigation. Concerns raised in an independent solicitor's report for that investigation included that Mr O'Callaghan withdrew substantial fees from the estate of a bereaved child.
