Judgments: key cases in brief

Clare-based engineer had standing to challenge administrative policy of Laois County Council. Duffy v Laois County Council [2014]IEHC 469 (High Court, Hogan J, 29 October 2014). High Court, by way of preliminary issue, determines: a) that the applicant, an engineer based in Co Clare, had the requisite standing to bring proceedings against Laois County Council's policy of charging a fee to prospective residents for the provision of on-site wastewater disposal systems analysis by qualified engineers, on the grounds that he had both the relevant qualifications and an economic interest in providing the service; and b) that the application was not out of time, as the council's policy was a general one with a daily accrual of time.

Ian Fitzharris BL

Failure of challenge to arrangement allowing Northern Irish vessels to fish for mussel seed in Irish waters. Barlow v. Minister for Agriculture [2014]IEHC 471 (High Court, Birmingham J, 28 October 2014).

High Court refuses to declare that an arrangement whereby Northern Irish registered vessels fished for mussel seed in Irish waters was unconstitutional or unlawful, on grounds that there was no requirement for legislation to govern such an arrangement, and the courts were not entitled to supervise or interfere with the government in the exercise of its executive functions unless it was in clear disregard of its powers.

Mark Tottenham BL

Father involved in child custody case received a fair hearing. A.B. -v- C.D. [2014]IEHC 450 (High Court, Keane J, 8 October 2014).

High Court, in custody proceedings involving a 12-year-old boy, dismisses the father’s application to set aside earlier orders of on grounds of objective bias on the part of the judge, finding, inter alia, that: i) a reasonable person could not have a reasonable apprehension that the father did not receive a fair hearing; and ii) the father was not deprived of the opportunity to allege bias in front of the original judge and, by failing to raise it at that point, had waived his right to do so later.

Conor O’Higgins BL

Sentence of life imprisonment for attempted murder was lawful despite significant mitigating factors. DPP v. Daniels [2014]IESC 64 (Supreme Court, Dunne J, 4 November 2014).

Supreme Court, on a point of law of exceptional public importance as certified by the Court of Criminal Appeal, declares that a sentence of life imprisonment for the attempted murder of a young girl was lawful, on the grounds that: a) the court was entitled to give the maximum available penalty available under statute, even where there were significant mitigating factors in play; and b) it did not constitute a sentence of preventative detention, but had been appropriately imposed having regard to the very grave circumstances of the offence.

Ciaran Joyce BL

Applicant for asylum found not to be at risk of female genital mutilation where her mother was opposed to the procedure. A.M. v. Levey [2014]IEHC 501 (High Court, Barr J, 1 October 2014).

High Court refuses judicial review of a decision by the

Refugee Appeals Tribunal

to refuse asylum to a minor from

Sierra Leone

who claimed to be at risk of female genital mutilation, where the applicant’s mother was opposed to the procedure and it had not been established that there was a risk of it being carried out against the parent’s wishes.

James Cross BL

Sexual orientation of applicant for asylum was central to his claim. C.C. v. Refugee Appeals Tribunal [2014]IEHC 491 (High Court, McDermott J, 28 October 2014).

High Court grants judicial review of decision of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal to refuse asylum to a Nigerian national, on the grounds that the Tribunal failed to make a finding on his sexual orientation, which was the core aspect of his claim.

James Cross BL

Authorisation from Personal Injuries Assessment Board was not validly served when sent by “DX tracked mail”. Power v. Personal Injuries Assessment Board [2014]IEHC 480 (High Court, O’Malley J, 24 October 2014).

High Court grants judicial review of refusal by Personal Injuries Assessment Board to issue a fresh authorisation to bring proceedings, where the original authorisation had been sent by “DX tracked mail” but had not been received by the solicitor on record, on grounds that the relevant legislation did not provide for documents to be served by the “DX” service.

Mark Tottenham BL

In camera rule lifted to allow disclosure of information to trustee in US bankruptcy. J.D. -v- S.D. [2013]IEHC 648 (High Court, Abbott J, 6 December 2013).

High Court grants order lifting the in camera rule, and orders a divorced couple involved in ongoing Irish matrimonial proceedings to disclose, subject to redaction and constraints of confidentiality, such documents, information and evidence as was required by the trustee in the ex-husband’s US bankruptcy and authorised by the US Court, on the grounds that the information was required to see whether he made avoidable transfers of property to his new wife.

Conor O’Higgins BL

The full text of each judgment can be found on: courts.ie. These reports are provided by Stare Decisis Hibernia: staredecisishibernia.com