Material in this subsubseries relates to the case of Webb v Ireland, and the ownership of archaeological objects discovered by members of the public.
Michael Webb and his son, also called Michael, discovered a significant hoard of early church treasure in Derrynaflan, County Tipperary, using metal detectors, February 1980. The large monastic enclosure in which the hoard was found was partially protected as a National Monument. The Webbs reported their discovery to Dr Elizabeth Shee Twohig, an archaeologist from University College Cork, who advised them to take the finds to the National Museum of Ireland in Dublin. Under Irish law at that time, the finders were entitled to a reward for making the discovery, in this case decided at IR£10,000. This was initially rejected by the Webbs as insufficient compared to the value of the find. On 10/12/1986, the High Court ruled that the find or its value (estimated at IR£5.5 million) should be returned to the Webbs. This was appealed and on 16/12/1987, the Supreme Court ruled that the Derrynaflan Hoard in fact belonged to the state and not to the finders but ordered that the finders be paid the same amount as the land owners, because the finders had been promised honourable treatment, and thus had a legitimate expectation with regard to the reward. The finders finally received a reward of £50,000 (£25k each). The Derrynaflan Hoard is on permanent display at the National Museum of Ireland.
The impact of the case on Irish law concerning the protection of heritage was significant. In 1987 the National Monuments (Amendment) Bill, which included a clause on metal detecting, passed through its final stages in the Dáil Éireann (lower house of the Irish Parliament). A further National Monuments (Amendment) Act 1994 specified the state ownership of archaeological objects, and made it ‘an offence to trade in unreported antiquities, or withhold information about archaeological discoveries’ . Under the 1994 legislation, the maximum penalty was also increased to a fine of IR£50,000 and five years’ imprisonment.
[Archivist's Note 1: Mary Robinson is nominated to this case as Senior Counsel (SC) by Attorney General on 10/12/1985 - some of the earlier material in this subseries is used at a later date as part of her research into the case, and/or as material which was submitted to court)
Archivist's Note 2: some material refers to "the royal prerogative", which is more commonly known as the rule of “Treasure Trove” and which exists in the UK, where any treasure found belongs to the crown.]
