The Westmeath Independent
Ronan Emmet writes:
Any of your readers have any opinion on the story (above). This car park was notorious for clamping cars.
Is it tough luck for people who were clamped and had to pay release fees or are they entitled to look for money back considering the car park did not have permission to operate as a commercial car park?
Anyone?
Commercial car park “had no planning permission” (Westmeath Independent)
Sponsored Link
Lol money back, fools for parking and fools for paying.
Good luck trying to get any money from an entity in receivership
I am quite sure that a lack of planning permission does not invalidate the contractual relationship between the car-park operator and those that were clamped.
However: “No court will lend its aid to a man who founds his cause of action upon an immoral or an illegal act. If, from the plaintiff’s own standing or otherwise, the cause of action appears to arise ex turpi causa [“from an immoral cause”], or the transgression of a positive law of this country, there the court says he has no right to be assisted. It is upon that ground the court goes; not for the sake of the defendant, but because they will not lend their aid to such a plaintiff. ” From the judgement in Holman v. Johnson, 1775.
This is superseded by the canonical law Iniuria non excusat iniuriam as I’m sure your mammy told you.
No clue :)