We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
IRISH MOTORISTS buying new cars are likely to see their tax bills fall at some point this year, after the European Commission formally told Ireland to change its vehicle registration tax laws.
The Commission yesterday said it had lodged a formal request with Ireland to change its laws and allow for the fact that new cars begin to lose some of their value as soon as they are purchased and brought into use.
That ruling, made in case law by the European Court of Justice, means that the amount of tax payable on a vehicle can’t be higher than the tax due on similar vehicles which are already registered in that country.
Under current Irish law, however, cars which are less than three months old – or which have less than 3,000 kilometres on their odometer – bear the same tax burden as ‘new’ vehicles.
The European Commission said this meant motorists buying cars younger than three months old were being discriminated against, as they were paying proportionately more for their motor tax then drivers of similar but older cars.
Rules contained in EU treaties prohibit member states from imposing higher taxes on products imported from the EU than are charged on domestic products.
In taxes which are only levied once – such as Ireland’s vehicle registration tax – the court said part of this tax remained “incorporated in the value of second-hand vehicles already registered on the national market”.
Because the ‘value’ of this tax falls in line with the value of the car, EU rules are breached if the tax on an imported second-hand car is higher than the ‘residual’ tax paid on similar second-hand cars which have already been registered in that country.
The ruling may provide another financial headache for the Irish government, however: last year the Irish state earned around €375 million in vehicle registration tax.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
It was burning. ‘She later used it a second time’. I put my hand in the fire. It burned. I took it out and ran it under a cold tap. I thought this was normal. I stick my hand in again. I s*^t you not. It started to burn again
@Dessie Curley: Given the product was a chemical skin peel it would be reasonable to expect some sensation.
Also, you know if you stick your hand in a fire you’ll be injured. It’s a reasonable expectation that of a expert you have paid recommends a product to you that it won’t cause extensive and lasting skin damage.
Every last one of these cosmetic products carry a warning on the packet to ‘apply a test patch’ or ‘discontinue use if skin irritation occurs’ not that isn’t just basic common sense…
With company out of business – who pays the €37K. Genuine question.
Retroactive claim from the liability insurance policy held by the business at the time of the incident.
They wouldn’t bother suing a wound down Ltd. company and joining the list of creditors.
But she didn’t have a facial. She opted for a chemical peel that works by burning off the top layers of your skin. BURNING OFF. Total rubbish. She didn’t deserve a penny.
The beauty therapist told her she had sensitive skin and then recommended the product. Clearly at fault. The amount awarded seems high to me though.
Saw a photo of her on another site. Poor woman looks destroyed :)
about 20% of white Irish women have rosacea. I could have an extra 35k now if only I’d the cop on!!! Was the Groupon facial!
Exactly – if she’d been diagnosed with contact dermatitis or some allergic response I’d say fair enough, but rosacea is a common condition of unknown cause.
@Tom the Bomb: A common condition which she didn’t have before she used the recommended product.
have your say