The High Court has struck out a claim brought by Val Hickey arising from a long-running dispute over his tax registration, Revenue assessments and enforcement steps dating back more than a decade.
Mr Hickey alleged that he had been wrongly re-registered for VAT and income tax in or around 2011 after having been deregistered several years earlier. He claimed that this led to incorrect assessments, a Revenue warrant, prosecution for late filing of returns and financial and health consequences.
Ms Justice Nuala Jackson found that the essential facts did not support a viable cause of action against Revenue official Joseph Howley.
The court noted that Mr Hickey continued trading during the period in question but did not file the required income tax returns. Revenue subsequently raised assessments and sent a warrant to the Dublin City Sheriff. When Mr Hickey later filed returns showing that his trading did not meet the VAT threshold, the VAT assessments were withdrawn in February 2014. His solicitor informed him of that outcome the following month.
Separately, Mr Hickey had been prosecuted in the District Court for failure to file returns and was convicted and fined in September 2013. He did not appeal that conviction or bring judicial review proceedings concerning it.
The judge held that the allegations of wrongdoing against Revenue officials were vague and unsupported by any reasonable basis for believing evidence might later emerge to sustain them.
The court also found the proceedings were out of time. Most tort claims are subject to a six-year limitation period, while personal injury claims generally have a two-year limit. The events complained of had crystallised by March 2014, but the proceedings were not issued until September 2023.
The claims were therefore struck out as disclosing no reasonable cause of action, having no reasonable prospect of success and being bound to fail. Mr Howley was presumptively entitled to his costs, subject to written submissions from Mr Hickey if he sought a different order.