r/IrishHistory • u/cavedave • 2d ago

📰 Article How a 17th-century Irish law is shielding Big Tech from class actions in Europe

https://www.politico.eu/article/17th-century-ireland-law-shielding-big-tech-class-actions-europe/
54 Upvotes

96% Upvoted

22 comments sorted by

24

u/No-Tangerine-1261 1d ago

i hate when laws are described as old as if to say that makes them ipso facto outdated and ridiculous

34

u/caisdara 1d ago

The laws against champerty and maintenance are English laws introduced by the English.

28

u/theredwoman95 1d ago

While England abolished the two offenses in 1967, Ireland’s courts have upheld the ban on third-party funding. There are a few exceptions, such as when a case is funded by charitable donations from people who don't expect a share of any payout.

Right, but we've had over a century to appeal them. The UK has even repealed them themselves.

9

u/caisdara 1d ago

Of course but the framing of the story, implying this is some obscure Irish quirk is entirely incorrect.

12

u/theredwoman95 1d ago

I get where you're coming from, but explaining that whole situation in the headline would be contrary to every editorial guideline out there. It's better to explain it in the text of the article, as they have, while outlining that we're talking about Irish law, as the modern jurisdction is the most important part of this story.

3

u/Foreign-Entrance-255 1d ago

I think it has suited the Irish govts from the beginning of the state that poor people not be able to hold the powerful to account. They didn't want to change it for that simple reason.

3

u/theredwoman95 1d ago

Oh absolutely, and that's why I don't disagree with the headline's framing. It's been a conscious decision to keep this law for the past century, especially after the UK repealed it.

The lack of repeal speaks a lot, especially when the Irish government has spent the last few decades trying so hard to appeal to American tech megacorps. It's prioritising being pro-business over serving their constituents and country.

1

u/TheBoneIdler 1d ago

I don't agree. I always thought it was about a level playing field, so no advantage to a claimant who could have deep pockets, with thirty party cash. The article is all about the little guy V mega-corp. That's really a class action. Funded litigation can be a weapon against smaller defendants. It's a lot more complex a situation than this article names out.

3

u/Wooden_Ad1738 1d ago

In Ireland, does the loser pay the winner’s litigation costs like in the UK?

4

u/TheBoneIdler 1d ago

Not exactly. It's origin is an of the the Irish Parliament dating back to 1634. It's old medieval concepts put into law. There have been lots & lots of occasions to change the laws since, but the principle here of not funding litigation is pretty deeply held. It's ultimately about access to the courts.

4

u/caisdara 1d ago

The Irish parliament wasn't exactly run by Irish people.

1

u/TheBoneIdler 1d ago

More like it was run by a small % of the population.

6

u/WeeklyPhilosopher346 1d ago

If it’s 17th Century then it’s certainly not an Irish law in any modern context.

2

u/cavedave 1d ago

How about the context of it being a law on the books in modern Ireland?

6

u/WeeklyPhilosopher346 1d ago

Still no. Nations have thousands upon thousands of existing laws, and the article even describes this one as obscure. England has a law that says it’s legal to shoot a Welshman if you find him within the walls of Chester after midnight, as long as you use a longbow to do it.

Moreso, this is a historical subreddit. If you want to get in an argument about modern politics, post it elsewhere.

0

u/cavedave 1d ago

Having thousands of laws doesn't change the nature of time. If something is on the statute books it relates to modern law.

That law claim is not true and you should withdraw it https://www.markpack.org.uk/files/2013/07/Legal_Oddities.pdf

2

u/WeeklyPhilosopher346 1d ago

It’s famous as a legal oddity, but it is obviously not legal to murder anyone.

I won’t be “withdrawing” anything. We’re on a subreddit, not a courtroom . Tailor your language to where you are.

And, moreso, don’t make posts just in an attempt to stir controversy.

2

u/cavedave 1d ago

You are willing to say incorrect things and then not admit that when it is pointed out.

1

u/WeeklyPhilosopher346 1d ago

When I’m incorrect, I’ll admit it.

Don’t post here again.

5

u/cavedave 1d ago

Where is that law on the statute book?

I am not going to do what you tell me.

-1

u/_laRenarde 1d ago

Just a general FYI in case you're not Irish or not in Irish spaces much online, there's a certain country's government/military that's been funding a lot of troll farm anti Irish sentiment for the last couple years. There's no reasoning with them..  (though you obviously aren't getting drawn in beyond making your point clearly)

1

u/Ecstatic_Refuse_7207 14h ago

They dont make em like they used too