Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
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 |
High Court grants judicial review of the decision refusing access to documents which show cabinet discussions on Ireland’s greenhouse gas emissions from 2002 to 2016, on the grounds that such discussions on greenhouse gases are not immune from obligation make environmental information available, and the decision refusing access failed to give adequate reasons.
Judicial review – substantive decision - privilege – cabinet confidentiality – application for access to “all documents which show cabinet discussions on Ireland’s greenhouse gas emissions from 2002 to 2016 refused - European Communities (Access to Information on the Environment) Regulations, 2007 – 2014 and Directive 2003/4/EC on Public Access to Environmental Information – internal review refused the request – did not appeal – issued judicial review – relevant statutory provisions - An Taoiseach v. Commissioner for Environmental Information - whether the respondents are seeking to rely on new legal grounds to justify the review decision-maker’s refusal to disclose, which were not set out in the review decision or in the original decision - whether Government discussions are “internal communications” under Article 4(1)(e) of the Directive, as found by O’Neill J. in An Taoiseach v. Commissioner for Environmental Information – whether the review decision-maker’s invoking of Article 10(2) of the AIE Regulations form a legitimate basis upon which to refuse the requested information – decision-maker should not have interpreted the law as somehow immunising cabinet discussions from the rigors of the Directive - decision-maker was obliged to have regard to the overarching premise of Article 3(1) of the Directive, which provides that requested environmental information “shall” be made available - alleged absence of reasons.
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.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.