CAN I BRING AN ACTION AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT?

Curly Judge

I would dearly love to bring an action against our government to stop them from allowing bank bailout money going to pay the pensions of any worker in these banks.
Could I bring it under the constitution where it says that all the people should be treated equally?
Or could I bring it on the simple grounds of the government allowing our taxes to be miss-spent by selectively choosing to featherbed a privileged section of our society and not others. IE under some finance act?
I am of sound mind, have plenty of spare time, am reasonably articulate and hopping f**king mad at this carry on!

mahamageehad

You do realise that the majority of workers in those banks had nothing to do with the banking crisis? Most of them were and are just trying to pay the bills like the rest of us. Why victimise them for the mistakes of a privileged few? How in the name of god is that treating people equally?

Curly Judge

mahamageehad wrote: »

You do realise that the majority of workers in those banks had nothing to do with the banking crisis? Most of them were and are just trying to pay the bills like the rest of us. Why victimise them for the mistakes of a privileged few? How in the name of god is that treating people equally?

Are you for real or does your daughter work in one of these banks?
My private pension wasn't topped up when it was decimated, in large part by the greed and incompetence of these same banks.
Waterford Crystal workers weren't compensated by the exchequer when their company failed.
If these bank workers pensions are in trouble due to over- generous payments to former retirees then tough titty. Let them pony up more of their own salary to mend their pension fund or retire in reduced circumstances like the rest of us.
I fail to see why I should pay?

Meesared

Theyre right, in fairness, most of the people working in banks are just trying to pay the bills like you and me.

dvpower

Curly Judge wrote: »

Could I bring it under the constitution where it says that all the people should be treated equally?

No.



Try ringing Joe Duffy.

Procrastastudy

The Irish courts are extremely reluctant to tell the Government how to run the country. Its called the separation of powers and judicial deference. To even get to that stage you'd have to establish Locus Standi - perhaps possible in the opinion of a second year law student, probably not in reality.

Surely though the few hundred thousand you have tucked away to pay for your legal team could be better spent? Perhaps you could put your spare time to more productive use in an organisation dealing with all this in a more level headed manner.

GreeBo

Curly Judge wrote: »

I am of sound mind

Debatable.

What exactly would you be hoping to achieve from this action?
Because it sounds like what you would achieve is these people dipping into their state pensions.

coolhull

Quote:I am of sound mind, have plenty of spare time, am reasonably articulate and hopping f**king mad at this carry on!
Curly Judge is online now

Yes you may be of sound mind, and have spare time, but do you have plenty of spare money? Taking a case against the government costs plenty of money(if you could a barrister to take it on)
Anyway why do you only want to take the bank workers on? Why not the bank executives, the retired politicians, higher civil servants, teachers, guards etc. Your tax money is paying all their pensions. Why stop at the bank tellers?
Of course you can take the Govt to court. Good luck with that!

Nonoperational

I think you knew the answer to this question before you posted it...

Curly Judge

GreeBo wrote: »

Debatable.

What exactly would you be hoping to achieve from this action?
Because it sounds like what you would achieve is these people dipping into their state pensions.

I would hope to stop taxpayers money being used to to top up the pensions of people I, as a taxpayer, have no responsibility for.
I would seek to stop taxpayers money being used in a corrupt and selective way.
That's what I would be hoping to achieve.

Procrastastudy

Curly Judge wrote: »

I would hope to stop taxpayers money being used to to top up the pensions of people I, as a taxpayer, have no responsibility for.
I would seek to stop taxpayers money being used in a corrupt and selective way.
That's what I would be hoping to achieve.

'That's a matter for the Oireachtas' would be a phrase I'd get used to I'm afraid OP. This is a political rather than a legal matter.

Curly Judge

coolhull wrote: »

Quote:I am of sound mind, have plenty of spare time, am reasonably articulate and hopping f**king mad at this carry on!
Curly Judge is online now

Yes you may be of sound mind, and have spare time, but do you have plenty of spare money? Taking a case against the government costs plenty of money(if you could a barrister to take it on)
Anyway why do you only want to take the bank workers on? Why not the bank executives, the retired politicians, higher civil servants, teachers, guards etc. Your tax money is paying all their pensions. Why stop at the bank tellers?
Of course you can take the Govt to court. Good luck with that!

When I said bank workers I meant everybody in the bank from the highest to the lowest.
Leave the politicians and teachers out of it, [for the moment].
Don't try to muddy the waters by bringing in public servants please.

Nonoperational

Have you been drinking?

miss tickle

Curly Judge wrote: »

I would dearly love to bring an action against our government to stop them from allowing bank bailout money going to pay the pensions of any worker in these banks.
Could I bring it under the constitution where it says that all the people should be treated equally?
Or could I bring it on the simple grounds of the government allowing our taxes to be miss-spent by selectively choosing to featherbed a privileged section of our society and not others. IE under some finance act?
I am of sound mind, have plenty of spare time, am reasonably articulate and hopping f**king mad at this carry on!

Sorry mate, already brought before European Parliament by a guy from Donegal, If you google 'Mauled by the Celtic Tiger', it may give you some access ideas, if not, e-mail the author, he may put you on the right track. Was thinking of this myself but don't have the time.

Meesared

Curly Judge wrote: »

When I said bank workers I meant everybody in the bank from the highest to the lowest.
Leave the politicians and teachers out of it, [for the moment].
Don't try to muddy the waters by bringing in public servants please.

See this is where your argument loses traction, 95% of bank staff have no input in the running of the company

Curly Judge

Procrastastudy wrote: »

'That's a matter for the Oireachtas' would be a phrase I'd get used to I'm afraid OP. This is a political rather than a legal matter.

Why did the SC rule as they did in the McCrystal case?
They found the government guilty of an abuse of their power, right?
I would be asking them to find the government of a dereliction of duty!

coolhull

Curly Judge wrote: »

When I said bank workers I meant everybody in the bank from the highest to the lowest.
Leave the politicians and teachers out of it, [for the moment].
Don't try to muddy the waters by bringing in public servants please.

Aah, so you're a Public Servant. That explains a lot... And it would explain why you have 'plenty of spare time'.

Scortho

hope you have deep pockets.
oh and if and when you do lose please don't do a Thomas Pringle on it and moan about having to pay costs. Its one of the consequences of bringing an action against someone.
You could lose and have costs awarded against you.
Or do you think the government should pay for it....

Curly Judge

Nonoperational wrote: »

Have you been drinking?

No!

Have you anything to contribute - apart from smamy, enigmatic remarks?

Procrastastudy

Curly Judge wrote: »

Why did the SC rule as they did in the McCrystal case?
They found the government guilty of an abuse of their power, right?
I would be asking them to find the government of a dereliction of duty!

You are taking one, very different case, in isolation there.

Perhaps you might enjoy some of the comments in TD v Minister for Education per Murphy J (Judgement available via google)

Curly Judge

coolhull wrote: »

Aah, so you're a Public Servant. That explains a lot... And it would explain why you have 'plenty of spare time'.

I am not, and never have been, a Public Servant.

Curly Judge

Scortho wrote: »

hope you have deep pockets.
oh and if and when you do lose please don't do a Thomas Pringle on it and moan about having to pay costs. Its one of the consequences of bringing an action against someone.
You could lose and have costs awarded against you.
Or do you think the government should pay for it....

Relax!
If I do take it on I certainly won't be coming to the likes of you for money.

Curly Judge

Meesared wrote: »

See this is where your argument loses traction, 95% of bank staff have no input in the running of the company

You must be trying to deliberatly misunderstand my argument?
I couldn't give a tinkers curse what imput they had, or had not, in running the company.
I am not responsible for the shortfall in the pensions of Aer Lingus, or Ryanair, or Glanbia and I fail to see why I'm responsible for the shortfall in the pensions of AIB.

Meesared

Why should regular workers be made responsible of the decisions of the higher ups in the company, it just doesnt make any sense.

coolhull

Curly Judge wrote: »

Relax!
If I do take it on I certainly won't be coming to the likes of you for money.

Oooh, there's posh!

Curly Judge

coolhull wrote: »

Oooh, there's posh!

That's me!

Curly Judge

Meesared wrote: »

Why should regular workers be made responsible of the decisions of the higher ups in the company, it just doesnt make any sense.

Zambia

Meesared wrote: »

Why should regular workers be made responsible of the decisions of the higher ups in the company, it just doesnt make any sense.

All over the world workers pay the price for inept management. Not being on a ships crew does not stop you drowning.

GreeBo

Zambia wrote: »

All over the world workers pay the price for inept management. Not being on a ships crew does not stop you drowning.

in that case shouldn't we all pay the price for our governments inept management of the country?

Curly Judge

GreeBo wrote: »

in that case shouldn't we all pay the price for our governments inept management of the country?

But we are all paying!
My idea is to stop the government paying even more.
The government decided to let the Waterford Crystal workers pension scheme collapse.
Why are they supporting the pensions of bailed out bank staff?
Logic?..... anyone?
Fairness?.....anyone?

Tom Young

Best of luck with the case.

Unfortunately, the Courts are highly unlikely to intervene in financial and finance policy matters in re. government.

I completely agree with the sentiment, just the grounding of it would require something major for the courts to review.

Curly Judge

Tom Young wrote: »

Best of luck with the case.

Unfortunately, the Courts are highly unlikely to intervene in financial and finance policy matters in re. government.

I completely agree with the sentiment,
just the grounding of it would require something major for the courts to review.

The search is on!

tbayers

Actions like this should be brought against the government more often. After everybody said this was a lost cause, they go on to win the case. Well done to all!!


Mod: Here's the context - "European court rules in favour of former Waterford Crystal workers, Irish Examiner, Thursday, April 25, 2013"

hullaballoo

Ok, thread had died and you resurrected it to post nonsense. I'm now locking the thread.


Edit: Apparently, the above post relates to the recent ECJ decision relating to the Waterford Crystal workers' pension entitlements. Thread re-opened and post edited for context.