The High Court has ruled that section 1 of the Courts (No. 3) Act 1986, as amended, does not authorise a summons to be issued on an application by “V.P. McMullin”, a firm of solicitors and an unincorporated body of persons.
Mr Justice Conleth Bradley gave the ruling on 1 March 2024 in a consultative case stated from Donegal District Court. The question was whether the legislation allowed a summons application to be made in the firm’s name. The case stated was based on agreed facts about the summons and the firm’s status.
The summons, issued on 8 June 2018, alleged that Conor Quinn had failed to take steps required by a Donegal County Council enforcement notice concerning unauthorised development at Croagh, Dunkineely. The notice was dated 30 November 2017. The summons recorded that “V.P. McMullin, Solicitors” had applied for it on the council’s behalf.
At a District Court hearing in July 2021, Mr Quinn challenged the summons, arguing that the firm was not a legal person capable of applying under the legislation. The council accepted that the application was made by the firm, which it described as an unincorporated body, but argued that the Interpretation Act 2005 defines “person” to include such a body.
Mr Justice Bradley said that definition was the starting point, but the 2005 Act also required the court to consider whether the summons legislation showed a contrary intention. He examined its provisions as amended, including a requirement that a summons specify the name of the person who applied for it. He concluded that the legislation required an identifiable person and that its use of “person” in this context did not include an unincorporated body such as the firm.
The judge also considered an earlier High Court decision involving a firm with a similar name. He said that case had not decided the specific question before him and was not determinative.
The ruling answers the legal question referred by the District Court. It does not decide whether Mr Quinn committed the alleged planning offence. The judge said he would list the matter for mention on 9 April 2024 to discuss consequential matters, including costs.