The High Court has allowed the Revenue Commissioners, Ireland and the Attorney General to deliver an amended defence in a company’s claim over deductions from vehicle registration tax refunds. The court’s ruling concerns the pleadings only; it does not decide the merits of the company’s claim or the newly pleaded defences.
Greaney Solar Products Limited alleges that the Revenue Commissioners deducted €500 per vehicle when processing VRT refunds due to its vehicle-export business between 17 April 2013 and 31 December 2015. It puts the total deductions at €450,100 and seeks repayment, damages, interest and costs. The defendants’ original defence disputed that the charges were unjustified or disproportionate and argued that a Court of Justice ruling on the charge concerned a different situation.
The defendants sought permission to add alternative pleas, including that the company had not challenged the charge during the relevant period; that repayment of the full charge could amount to unjust enrichment; and that the State was not liable for damages on the basis advanced. They also pleaded that any breach was not sufficiently serious, was not deliberate, and that any loss may have been passed on to vehicle purchasers. These are defendants’ submissions, not findings by the High Court.
The company accepted that the proposed issues were arguable and arose from the existing dispute, and did not claim substantive prejudice. It objected that the application came only weeks before the scheduled trial, after the pleadings had been closed for more than four years. It argued that further discovery and evidence could be needed, delaying the case and adding costs. The substantive hearing, listed for 12 December 2023, had been adjourned after the defendants proceeded with their amendment application.
Justice Conleth Bradley said the amendment clarified legal consequences already raised in the original defence and did not radically change the issues. He found that the proposed change would not significantly disrupt the proceedings or cause unfairness. The ruling applied the rules governing amendments to pleadings; the judge expressly left the merits for the trial judge.
The court granted the defendants liberty to deliver an amended defence in the terms attached to the affidavit of State Solicitor Ruth Lynch. It made no final costs order at this stage, instead listing the matter for 27 February 2024 to address the costs of the amendment application and any related matters.