Richard Bruton (Dublin North Central, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Section 86, which the Government introduced on Report Stage in Dáil Éireann, provides that where a court has made a final finding in a particular case in respect of breaches of the grocery goods part of the Bill, that finding is res judicatafor the purpose of subsequent proceedings regardless of whether parties to those subsequent proceedings are the same as the parties to the first mentioned proceedings.

The provision that a finding in earlier proceedings shall be res judicatain subsequent proceedings lessens somewhat the burden on a private litigant who, relying on this legal doctrine, will not be required to prove the contravention of the relevant sections afresh in a follow-on action in respect of the same contravention. Rather, he or she will be able to rely on that earlier finding for the purpose of an action for damages. That earlier finding can be based on a successful prosecution by the new competition and consumer protection commission.
Expecting the new competition and consumer protection commission to pursue the issue of redress on behalf of aggrieved persons would have major resource implications for the new body and would constitute a duplication of the provisions of the Bill at section 83, inserting new section 63E(3), section 63E(4) and section 63E(5), and section 86.
As the Bill already makes sufficient provisions relating to the right of action by aggrieved parties and as I do not wish to see the new competition and consumer protection commission use its resources to duplicate the provisions of the Bill at sections 83 and 86, I am not in a position to accept the proposed amendment.