A DEMAND for water charges sent to the home of a Co Dublin man was adequate even though it did not include the name of his wife, who is joint owner, the High Court decided yesterday.
Mr Dermot Lynch, of Berwick Rise, Swords Manor, Co Dublin, received a demand for £255 from Fingal County Council for water supplied for domestic purposes in the years 1994, 1995 and 1996. The demand was addressed to "Occupier or Dermot Lynch".
Following legal argument at a Swords District Court hearing last April, Judge Timothy Crowley decided to ask the High Court's assistance on a number of questions.
The judge had asked the High Court to decide whether Mr Dermot Lynch alone was "the consumer", whether his wife and any other residents were "consumers and whether, if more than one person came within the statutory definition of "consumer", it was necessary for the authority to serve a demand on each person coming within the definition.
Yesterday, in a reserved judgment, Mr Justice Geoghegan said he was firmly of the view that the demand sent each year in this case was adequate. It was addressed to occupier or Dermot Lynch". With that mode of address it was sufficient demand to both Mr Lynch and Mrs Lynch.
The judge said it could not have been intended by the Oireachtas that the exactly correct names would always be set out in a written demand as that would make the legislation unworkable.
Mr Lynch was awarded costs.