## Facts

- A corporate group used multiple wholly owned subsidiaries for property acquisition and development financing.
- Thomas McInerney & Co. Ltd. contracted to purchase land in County Dublin, but directed that legal title be conveyed to another wholly owned subsidiary, McInerney Construction Ltd.
- Thomas McInerney & Co. Ltd. funded the acquisition, but did not take possession, did not document an express trust in its favor, and had no clear security for the advance.
- The planning authority refused permission for development; an appeal was later dismissed.
- After the appeal failed, Thomas McInerney & Co. Ltd. (not the registered owner) served a statutory purchase notice requiring the planning authority to purchase the land if it did not respond within three months.
- The planning authority replied that it would not purchase the land; the company argued the reply was out of time and sought to compel purchase.
- Proceedings were brought seeking judicial review relief in the nature of mandamus compelling the authority to purchase the land.

## Issues

1. Whether a company that funded acquisition but did not hold legal title qualified as the statutory “owner” entitled to serve a purchase notice under the planning legislation.
2. Whether the court should disregard separate corporate personality within the group so the funding subsidiary could be treated as “owner.”
3. Whether mandamus should issue compelling a purchase where the notice was served by a non-owner and other statutory routes remained available.
4. When service by post is effective where a statute authorizes postal service (delivery versus internal receipt).

## Decision

- The court held the funding subsidiary was not the statutory “owner”; the registered legal owner was the titleholding subsidiary.
- The court refused to pierce the corporate veil to treat group companies as a single entity for purposes of the statutory “owner” requirement.
- Mandamus was denied because the purchase notice was not validly served by the statutory owner and alternative statutory procedures remained available.
- For statutory notices served by post, service was effective on delivery to the addressee’s address, not on later internal receipt by a particular department.

## Legal Principles

- Statutory terms such as “owner” in compulsory purchase-style planning mechanisms ordinarily refer to the legal titleholder, not an unpaid funder or grantor absent a recognized legal/equitable ownership status.
- Separate corporate personality is the default rule for group companies; the corporate veil is lifted only in exceptional cases where justice requires it, not to remedy adverse consequences of a group’s own structuring choices.
- Courts will not expand or remodel a statutory scheme to cure legislative omissions or contingencies through mandamus; public-law compulsion requires a clear legal right and is discretionary.
- Where a statute authorizes service by post, service occurs upon delivery to the address, and administrative delays in internal distribution do not postpone effective service.

## Conclusion

The High Court treated the “owner” requirement as a formal legal-title rule, declined to disregard corporate separateness to validate a defective purchase notice, and refused mandamus where the applicant lacked a clear statutory right and could pursue other statutory steps; it also confirmed that postal service is effective upon delivery to the stated address.


State (Prosec. of Thomas McInerney & Co. Ltd.) v. County Council of the County of Dublin, [1985] I.R. 1 (H.C. 1984)