High Court, in a consultative case stated from proceedings concerning the legality of collection of commercial rates by city council, remits the case back to the District Court without having answered the question asked, on the grounds that the District judge made no findings of fact as required in consultative case stated procedure, and it is not possible for High Court to answer a question on a point of law without knowing whether it actually arises as an issue in the case.
Consultative case stated - collection of commercial rates - jurisdiction of the District Court to consider alleged illegality of the rates arising from alleged breaches of European Union rules on State aid – company that operates swimming pools and leisure facilities states that the city council operates similar services – company argued that State money received by the city council from commercial rates distorts or threatens to distort competition in this market – argued that the city council enjoys tax advantages in relation to its operations in the leisure market, which also constitute State aid – argued that in breach of EU requirements, the State aid in question has not been notified to the European Commission – claimed that the city council in receipt of unlawful State aid and that the District Court was obliged by EU law to vindicate its rights by granting relief from the rates liability and/or by awarding damages equivalent to the amount of rates sought to be collected - whether the District Court has jurisdiction to consider the defendant’s EU State Aid complaint and/or challenge to the legality of the rates charged by Dublin City Council - State aid rules – jurisdiction of the District Court - consultative case stated procedure - supremacy of EU law - any question of law arising in such proceedings - must be a finding of fact - no findings of fact have been made.