Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appellants’ appeal against the High Court’s refusal to set aside an earlier High Court interlocutory order concerning ownership of a commercial property. The appellants, acting as litigants-in-person, argued that the High Court judge had failed to consider alleged procedural irregularities under the Rules of the Superior Courts, particularly regarding the acceptance and treatment of affidavits. The Court of Appeal affirmed the High Court’s decision, finding that the mechanism used (an application under RSC Order 124) was not applicable to final High Court orders and that the appellants had not established any substantial irregularity. The court clarified that any complaints about the merits of the earlier decision should have been addressed through an appeal, which the appellants had initially declined to pursue. The judgment also criticised unwarranted comments concerning the appellants’ assistance in court due to disability, and ordered costs against the appellants, with a further costs issue to be addressed separately.
application to set aside order – interlocutory injunction – appeal dismissed – commercial property ownership dispute – litigant-in-person – Rules of the Superior Courts – Order 124 RSC – Order 40 RSC – affidavit evidence – High Court order – appeal procedure – procedural irregularity – costs – constitutional arguments – disability accommodations in court – Greendale jurisdiction – finality of proceedings
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
The only subject matter index for all Irish judgments over the past thirteen years. Click here to request a subscription.
Register Now