Last week we received word that NAMA intends to seek a continuation of the stay on the judgment of the High Court in relation to National Asset Management Agency -v- Commissioner for Environmental Information [2013] IEHC 86 (that “and includes” means “and includes”), pending an appeal to the Supreme Court.
The continuation of the stay would prevent the judgment from taking effect. This would mean that NAMA would not be subject to AIE requests in the interim.
The judge in the case, Judge Colm Mac Eochaidh, invited myself as the requester, to make a submission to the court, as he was concerned about the impact on my rights in the
event that a stay is put in place.
Appeals to the Supreme Court are taking in the region of four years to be heard in the absence of an application for priority. And even if the case is deemed a priority it could still take at least a year for the matter to be dealt with on appeal.
Counsel for NAMA indicated that it did not intend to make written submissions to the court in relation to the application, but intended to rely on certain authorities (such as Danske Bank v Niall McFadden).
We have formulated a written submission to the Court and intend to make an oral submission to the court in the morning, April 17. It is due to be heard at 10.30am.
We will update as we get news, and publish our submission to the Court tomorrow. You can follow us on Twitter @gavinsblog and @fplogue.
Tomorrow it will be 1,169 days since our AIE request was sent to NAMA. It is estimated that thus far the case has cost the taxpayer €121,350, and any Supreme Court appeal will obviously increase that figure.
The government is using our money to buy time and secrecy.
What’s new.?