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 |
Court of Appeal dismisses appeal (in its entirety) and cross appeal of High Court orders concerning whether a claim in respect of the alleged wrongful disclosure of information by the Gardaí in advance of defamation proceedings in December 2003 was statute barred, after reconsidering and changing its first judgment in light of a misunderstanding that the trial judge's words amounted to a “ruling” on the question as to whether there was evidence adduced during the trial in relation to the alleged wrongful disclosure of witness statements to the respondents, on the grounds that: a) the Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to reconsider its judgment; b) the respondents have discharged the requisite onus of establishing that the judicial error made in the first judgment, which was not caused by either party, has potential consequences which may include a denial of justice in the sense of a denial of fair procedures in the proceedings; and c) the trial judge failed to give a ruling on the question as to whether an issue or issues should be left to the jury in relation to the alleged claim for damages for breach of a constitutional right to privacy by reason of alleged unlawful disclosures of confidential information, namely witness statements or a list of names of persons who gave statements by the Gardaí, and such failure was not such as to have prejudiced the plaintiff in his trial.
Practice and procedure – application to the Court to reconsider its judgment – whether a claim in respect of the alleged wrongful disclosure of the information by the Gardaí in advance of the defamation proceedings in December 2003 was statute barred – allegation that members of An Garda Síochána engaged in a conspiracy to injure the appellant's reputation and to violate his constitutional rights in the investigation of a murder – trial judge’s rulings on the statute of limitations in relation to the plaintiff’s causes of action including the cause of action in conspiracy – jurisdiction of the Court to reconsider – whether the trial judge's words amounted to a “ruling” on the question as to whether there was evidence adduced during the trial in relation to the alleged wrongful disclosure of witness statements to the defendants – jurisdiction of the Court to revisit its judgment – whether the error is such that the necessity of justice dictates that the Court should allow the application to reopen that part of its decision – whether its decision to remit part of the plaintiff’s claim to the High Court should stand notwithstanding the error in the first judgment – adequacy of evidence – rule against hearsay – McGrath: Evidence (2005 Thompson Round Hall) – in the interests of justice Court's decision will be changed – appeal of plaintiff and cross appeal of respondents dismissed.
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 e-mail alert service for all Irish judgments over the past 13 years. Click here to request a subscription.
Register Now