D
Descart
The case cited by you in the above post was heard by the Supreme Court on appeal from the High Court. You could have picked from thousands of other cases where the Supreme Court exercised its appellate jurisdiction so I am unclear what you think this particular case demonstrates in this regard.
Sarenco,
I picked this particular case, as well you know, because the matter in dispute was a European Directive, similar in respect to the Millar's case, as Unfair terms in Consumer contracts Regulations, is also a European Directive ( whether the Millars sought to argue the unfairness of the term is irrelevant, there is an ECJ determination on Directive 93/13/EEC ( unfair terms ), which obliges a National Court on it's own motion to consider the directive regardless ). The case referred to, went to the Supreme Court, as it was a dispute regarding a European Directive, and under Article 29 of the Irish Constitution must be regarded as law until rescinded. If, for example, the Supreme Court had sided with Nama, I believe they would have first referred the matter to the ECJ for a determination, before issuing a judgment.
Secondly, it is likely that you have not heard of any appeal from the Appeal Court to the Supreme Court as the Appeal Court was only formed on the 20th July 2014, hardly time for any appeal to make it through to Judgment stage at the Supreme Court, so this argument is redundant.
I do agree with you that the Supreme court will only hear an appeal from the Appeal Court in exceptional circumstances, having said that, I believe the Millar's case is exceptional, in the fact that three Appeal Court Judges ignored an ECJ determination as to how they must act when considering contractual clauses, that being, Unfair terms in contract regulations. There can be no getting away from this exceptional and terminal error. I would go as far as to say, the Supreme Court is constitutionally bound to hear this appeal if or when they receive an application.
Finally, I believe the conversation referred to, took place in conversation mode, I was not privy to this, but I heard it from someone who was a party to the conversation.
I do not believe there is any realistic likelihood that the Supreme Court would consider that the jurisdictional thresholds would be met in this case. I am unaware of any reported cases to date where the Supreme Court has granted its permission for an appeal to proceed from the Court of Appeal.
Sarenco,
I think that Asphyxia, Descart and others are motivated by a high sense of justice and fair play.
Though you may summarily dismiss their posts as "entertaining" and of "no practical value" potential litigants who visit this website might find them informative and insightful in planning their approach to their lender, the FSO and the courts.
EU Directives are not trivia, which Irish courts, nor indeed the Irish State, can afford to ignore or fail to enforce.
"Because a thing seems difficult to you, do not think it impossible for anyone to accomplish" - Marcus Aurelius
I've absolutely no issue with anybody expressing their opinion and I assume you similarly have no such problem.
For what it's worth, I don't agree that the Unfair Contract Terms Directive could ever have had any application in the circumstances of this case. It's not at all clear to me that the Millars would have been considered consumers in the first place (their loans were primarily taken out for investment purposes) and I struggle to see what contractual term even potentially could have been considered unfair and therefore invalid (unless you consider all variable rate mortgages to be invalid) such that it warranted further consideration. At an absolute minimum, there is no "clearcut" breach of anything.
Well at least, it is now clear why you think what you think.
Could you elaborate on that? Are you suggesting my opinion on the jurisdictional issue is somehow dependant on this opinion?
No!
I don't see the point in elaborating. Your mind is clearly made up.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?