Dáil debates

Thursday, 10 April 2014

Fines (Payment and Recovery) Bill 2013: From the Seanad

 

10:45 am

Photo of Alan ShatterAlan Shatter (Dublin South, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

These three amendments concern recovery orders and amend sections 7 and 20 of the Bill. Seanad amendment No. 3 has the effect of limiting the making of recovery orders to fines greater than €500 except where the fined person is a company. This would have the effect of excluding 90% of fines imposed from the recovery provisions. Recovery is a relatively cumbersome procedure and to my mind should only be used where it makes sense to do so. Dispatching receivers to people's houses to recover property worth €100 does not make much sense, which is why I propose the new higher threshold for the making of such orders.

Seanad amendment No. 4 addresses the sequence in which the court is to consider which order to make in default. Under the Bill as passed in this House the court was first to consider making either an attachment order or a recovery order and only to proceed to consider a community service order where it determined that neither of the other orders should be made. Seanad amendment No. 4 changes this sequence and instead a court will first have to consider making an attachment order. If it decides against making an attachment order it then moves to consider making either a recovery order or a community service order. The court has a free choice in deciding whether to impose a recovery or community service order except, following Seanad amendment No. 3, if the fine is less than €500 the court may only make a community service order assuming it is able to do so.

Seanad amendment No. 6 is a consequential amendment to Seanad amendment No. 3 on the making of recovery orders where the fined person is a body corporate. Under section 2(2) of the Courts (No. 2) Act 1986 where a company defaults of a fine the fine is to be recovered by the seizure and disposal of the company's goods. Seanad amendment No. 6 repeals this provision so companies will now be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of section 7 which allows for the appointment of a receiver to recover the fine. Without this amendment two systems would effectively be in place to deal with default by bodies corporate.

To put it simply, the overall effect of Seanad amendments Nos. 3, 4 and 6 is to exclude the making of recovery orders in respect of small fines, to prioritise the making of attachment orders where a person is in employment and to put recovery and community service orders on an equal footing so a court can impose whichever it decides is the more appropriate in any particular case. These three amendments improve the Bill and will avoid the making of recovery orders where it would be better for all concerned if the person was required to do some community service which would benefit the person and the community. These changes are in line with changes I detailed to be under consideration when the Bill was before the House.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.