The High Court quashed a ComReg direction requiring An Post to deliver mail to a Cork customer using the geographic address “Blackstone Bridge, Watergrasshill” rather than the postal address An Post assigned to the property.
In a judgment delivered on 4 October 2012, Mr Justice Hedigan found that ComReg had failed to consider the significance of postal addresses to An Post’s delivery network. He also granted declarations sought by An Post about its statutory obligations. The court did not address the other issues raised because its decision on the direction disposed of the case.
The judicial review arose from a dispute over the home of Patrick and Sandra O’Connell. They wanted mail addressed to “Blackstone Bridge, Watergrasshill, County Cork”, which they said accurately described where they lived. An Post said the postal address was “Blackstone Bridge, Rathcormac, Co. Cork”, because the property was served from Rathcormac post office.
The couple had used Rathcormac in their address after buying the property in 2002. An Post said mail using Watergrasshill could be delayed because it had to be redirected between delivery offices. After An Post introduced an address verification tool in 2011, some mail addressed to Watergrasshill was marked as incorrectly addressed; the judgment records that some items were delayed or returned to sender.
ComReg issued its direction on 22 November 2011. It required An Post to recognise either “Blackstone Bridge, Ballinaltig, Watergrasshill, County Cork” or “Blackstone Bridge, Watergrasshill, County Cork” as proper addresses, deliver mail using either version on the next working day and not refuse, detain, withhold, return or dispose of it except as permitted by law. An Post challenged the direction, arguing that ComReg lacked authority to prescribe its addressing system and that compliance would disrupt its delivery arrangements.
ComReg argued that the addresses accurately described the customers’ location and that its statutory powers allowed it to direct delivery to meet users’ reasonable needs. The judge accepted that the geographic and postal addresses differed, and that post towns were an established part of An Post’s delivery system. He said the system supported fast delivery, even where a post town did not match a home’s precise geographic location.
The judge concluded that ComReg had tried to resolve a customer complaint but had stepped beyond its expertise by apparently ignoring the central role of postal addresses in An Post’s network. He held that the direction was ultra vires and quashed it. He also granted the declarations sought in paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of An Post’s reliefs, concerning postal addresses, electoral divisions and “properly addressing” under the Interpretation Act 2005.