CO TIPPERARY farmer John Hanrahan has won a High Court action over the seizure of his cattle following a dispute about their welfare.
Mr Hanrahan, who previously won a landmark case over damage to his animals from pollution from a neighbouring drug-manufacturing factory, had brought the action against the Minister for Agriculture over the seizure and later sale of the cattle.
The case concerned an agreement he reached with the department in 2006 for the return of most of the 355 seized cattle.
Mr Hanrahan claimed the department breached that agreement, and he also sought damages for loss incurred because, he claimed, 223 of the animals had been sold off for about one-third of their value.
He further claimed the department was negligent in how it cared for the animals prior to their being sold.
The department counter-claimed it was owed €81,000 for the transport and storage of the animals, and also alleged fraudulent misrepresentation by Mr Hanrahan.
Yesterday Mr Justice Bryan McMahon ruled there was no fraudulent misrepresentation such as to justify a repudiation by the Minister of the agreement with Mr Hanrahan.
He found Mr Hanrahan’s failure to fulfil undertakings relating to providing documentation about his herd and evidence about the amount of land he rented did not justify a repudiation of the agreement.
The department had failed to establish that Mr Hanrahan had made any positive misrepresentation in relation to what his state of mind was about the condition of his animals when they were seized, the judge also said.
The judge ruled a decision by officials to return some of Mr Hanrahan’s animals in May 2006 was on foot of the agreement and not, as the department contended, because of an independent decision under animal welfare regulations.
In failing to return most of the cattle, and by selling 233 of them in June 2006, the department breached the agreement, the judge said. Even if all the animals had been returned, they could always have been seized again if welfare issues arose in the future.
He upheld claims by the department it was justified in seizing the cattle on the evidence from officials that animals on the Hanrahan farm were in various stages of malnutrition and were suffering unnecessarily. This finding was not, however, fatal to Mr Hanrahan’s claim because this case was about breach of an agreement.
He further found the department was not in breach of its duty of care while the cattle were kept in a storage facility following their seizure and before their sale. The issue of damages will be addressed at a later stage.
Speaking to The Irish Timesafter the case, Mr Hanrahan said he was delighted with the ruling by Mr Justice McMahon. "It's a great judgment and the most important thing about it is that we are vindicated by it."
A Department of Agriculture spokeswoman said last night that they would not be commenting until they had received a copy of the judgment and had had an opportunity to study it.