State [at the Prosecution of Thomas McInerney and Co. Ltd.] v. County Council of the County of Dublin

Thomas McInerney and Company Ltd. (purchaser) (plaintiff) was one of 30 wholly owned subsidiaries of McInerney Properties Ltd. (Properties). On January 26, 1982, the purchaser contracted to buy certain property. At the purchaser’s direction, the property was conveyed to McInerney Construction Ltd. (Construction), which was another wholly owned subsidiary of Properties. Construction had no resources beyond those provided by another Properties subsidiary. The purchaser did not maintain possession of the property. Consistent with Properties’ practices, the purchaser supplied the money to acquire the property with the expectation of being repaid from the proceeds of the property’s development. The purchaser and Construction did not have a trustee-beneficiary relationship in which the purchaser was entitled to receive rents or profits from the property as a beneficial owner. It was unclear whether (and if so, how) the purchaser’s loan was secured. On June 4, 1982, the planning commission rejected an application regarding the property. An appeal of the planning commission’s rejection was denied on March 12, 1984. The purchaser served the County Council of the County of Dublin (council) (defendant) with a purchase notice dated April 4. On July 6, the council advised that it would not purchase the property. The purchaser sued the council, alleging that the council’s refusal was untimely because the council had only three months from the April 4 notice date to do so. Thus, the purchaser argued, the council was required to purchase the land pursuant to § 29 of the Local Government Planning and Development Act, 1963.The council responded that the act required that a purchase notice be submitted by the property’s owner and that the purchaser did not qualify because Construction was the property’s registered owner. The purchaser countered that the court should lift the corporate veil to recognize the purchaser as the property owner because the purchaser and Construction were wholly owned subsidiaries of Properties.