Iarnroid Eireann

chops018

Hi guys,

I do not wish to pursue this for the sake of 18 euro or whatever it is, but if the mods want they can close it and I apologise in advance. I just want a discussion on it.

Anyway I was supposed to get the train to Dublin for a GAA match a few weeks ago. But there was an accident on the track - there was a fatality on the line earlier that morning.

I didn't get to use the ticket and so I got the form for a refund, sent it away and today I got a letter back saying that "as the incident was outside of our control, I regret I am unable to offer a refund in this instance".

I assume they are coming into the sphere of frustration in contract law and novus actus interviens and all that.

Thoughts?

LowKeyReturn

I was going to suggest frustration as soon as I started to read you OP, then I see it's at the bottom there.

No post is complete without a tenuously linked anecdote so; Woman in Japan falls under a train at a station. Quickly there is an announcement for everyone on the platform to push the train away from the platform, being japan everyone complies and the woman is helped up from under the train. Train runs an outrageous 8 minutes late.

I realise this was a fatality and therefore different.

PS Does Novus Actus apply to contract law?

chops018

LowKeyReturn wrote: »

I was going to suggest frustration as soon as I started to read you OP, then I see it's at the bottom there.

No post is complete without a tenuously linked anecdote so; Woman in Japan falls under a train at a station. Quickly there is an announcement for everyone on the platform to push the train away from the platform, being japan everyone complies and the woman is helped up from under the train. Train runs an outrageous 8 minutes late.

I realise this was a fatality and therefore different.

PS Does Novus Actus apply to contract law?

I'm not sure about the Novus Actus to be honest.. I'm a bit hazy on the area!

I assumed it had to be an impossibility so as to render the contract impossible to perform, not a mere difficulty.

Haha I read that story with the Japs, fair play to them, the woman wasn't hurt.

Edit: Forgot to mention that it said that the train was terminated and customers were then transported by Bus. I was never made aware of this. Would that matter?

Victor

Their argument is that they performed their part of the contract, but they were stopped by the Garda authorities from passing the scene of the incident. some shuttle buses were provided.

There were two other incidents on that section of track on the same day, that were within the control of Irish Rail, so check what affected you.

http://www.railusers.ie/forum/showthread.php?t=14831
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056989957
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=85446724&postcount=1026

chops018

Victor wrote: »

Their argument is that they performed their part of the contract, but they were stopped by the Garda authorities from passing the scene of the incident. some shuttle buses were provided.

There were two other incidents on that section of track on the same day, that were within the control of Irish Rail, so check what affected you.

http://www.railusers.ie/forum/showthread.php?t=14831

What about the Fibrosa case?

I vaguely remember the principle being that if you received no tangible benefit from the contract then the equitable remedy of restitution of money paid will be recoverable. I'm not sure, but I don't think this was ever adopted by the Irish courts.

And it wasn't on the above day where people were on trains for 6 hours. The trains didn't even run this day, it was a Sunday for the GAA matches in Croker.

hullaballoo

LowKeyReturn wrote: »

PS Does Novus Actus apply to contract law?

No.


This is purely a contract issue and it falls pretty squarely under frustration. I'd be interested to see if anyone has any other defences or angles for attack, though. It seems to me that both parties here are innocent of any wrongdoing.

Cody Pomeray

Non haec in foedera veni: Would supplying a bus to get people to Dublin be radically different to conveying them there by train?

I have used the train to Dublin at times when there was a disruption, and we were instead taken by bus. In one memorable case, some people were even taken by taxi from Kerry to Mallow, and there were put upon the train to Dublin.

Remember it is not enough that the execution of a contract be onerous, or expensive, in order for frustration to arise. No, if the contract is to be frustrated, any resolution must be wholly different to what was previously contemplated.
( National Carriers Limited v. Panalpina (Northern) Limited, affirmed in the Supreme Court by Blayney J. in Neville & Sons Limited v. Guardian Builders [1995] 1 ILRM, and by Kelly J in Ringsend Property Limited v. Donatex Ltd & Bernard McNamara [2009] IEHC 568 (unreported))

Therefore the question is

Is the contract wide enough to apply to a conveyance by a vehicle other than a train: if it is not, then obviously the thing is frustrated.

The fact that Iarnród Éireann already do make use of shuttle buses in these types of situations, but did not do so here (because of cost or onerousness) suggests that this is at least something worthy of discussion between the OP and Iarnród Éireann.

I presume the OP was going to see the famous case of Dublin v. Kildare, and he can hopefully take comfort that great justice was done in that meeting.

chops018

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

Non haec in foedera veni: Would supplying a bus to get people to Dublin be radically different to conveying them there by train?

I have used the train to Dublin at times when there was a disruption, and we were instead taken by bus. In one memorable case, some people were even taken by taxi from Kerry to Mallow, and there were put upon the train to Dublin.

Remember it is not enough that the execution of a contract be onerous, or expensive, in order for frustration to arise. No, if the contract is to be frustrated, any resolution must be wholly different to what was previously contemplated.
( National Carriers Limited v. Panalpina (Northern) Limited, affirmed in the Supreme Court by Blayney J. in Neville & Sons Limited v. Guardian Builders [1995] 1 ILRM, and by Kelly J in Ringsend Property Limited v. Donatex Ltd & Bernard McNamara [2009] IEHC 568 (unreported))

Therefore the question is

Is the contract wide enough to apply to a conveyance by a vehicle other than a train: if it is not, then obviously the thing is frustrated.

The fact that Iarnród Éireann already do make use of shuttle buses in these types of situations, but did not do so here (because of cost or onerousness) suggests that this is at least something worthy of discussion between the OP and Iarnród Éireann.

I presume the OP was going to see the famous case of Dublin v. Kildare, and he can hopefully take comfort that great justice was done in that meeting.

Ha it was that match indeed.. a quick championship for the Lily's !

Well as I said I had no knowledge of the shuttle buses etc. so I was then wondering would that even matter.

I'm not bothered pursuing the 18 quid, it was just an interesting thought on whether they were in fact correct. It seemed suspect to me that they could get away with not giving a refund for a service that was never given.

Victor

What day was this so I can look at it in more detail?

Cody Pomeray wrote: »

The fact that Iarnród Éireann already do make use of shuttle buses in these types of situations, but did not do so here (because of cost or onerousness) suggests that this is at least something worthy of discussion between the OP and Iarnród Éireann.

As to performance of a service within a specific time period, Irish Rail don't have buses and bus drivers and are limited to what is available in the time frame.

chops018

Victor wrote: »

What day was this so I can look at it in more detail?
As to performance of a service within a specific time period, Irish Rail don't have buses and bus drivers and are limited to what is available in the time frame.

The day of the Kildare v Dublin match, the 30th of June.

Cody Pomeray

Victor wrote: »

As to performance of a service within a specific time period, Irish Rail don't have buses and bus drivers and are limited to what is available in the time frame.

Like I said, my experience is that they transport people when supervening events occur; I presume local stations do indeed have contacts that they call upon in the transport business. I believe you also made reference to shuttle buses above.

Again, case law establishes that cost or onerousness is no automatic path to frustration. The courts have said that frustration is to be applied narrowly.

Victor

chops018 wrote: »

The day of the Kildare v Dublin match, the 30th of June.

Incident happened at 00:20. Match was more than 12 hours later. Sure, these things take time, but they had time to do something.

http://www.railusers.ie/forum/showthread.php?t=14811
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=85315457&postcount=1024
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=85315693

chops018

Victor wrote: »

Incident happened at 00:20. Match was more than 12 hours later. Sure, these things take time, but they had time to do something.

http://www.railusers.ie/forum/showthread.php?t=14811
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=85315457&postcount=1024
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=85315693

I was a bit tender that day, I didn't arise till the afternoon to a text message saying the trains were off and that we have a mini bus hired to bring us up from the local pub.

flyingsnail

Victor wrote: »

Incident happened at 00:20. Match was more than 12 hours later. Sure, these things take time, but they had time to do something.

http://www.railusers.ie/forum/showthread.php?t=14811
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=85315457&postcount=1024
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=85315693

The incident that day happened at about 00:20 but the line wasn’t handed back by the gardai until about 13:00. If I remember correctly on that day intercity services were operating to Newbridge and Sallins where passengers were put on busses. I don’t know what happened with the local services.

Cody Pomeray

Victor wrote: »

Incident happened at 00:20. Match was more than 12 hours later. Sure, these things take time, but they had time to do something.

That is a logistical observation on making GAA matches in time, how is it relevant to Iarnród Éireann's contractual obligations (if any)?

Victor

If they pulled their thumb out, the could have fulfilled the contract in a (somewhat) timely manner. But no, Irish Rail doesn't do incident recovery.