Court of Appeal dismisses appeal of a decision of the High Court to refuse the applicant leave to seek judicial review relating to relate to two sets of proceedings, the being criminal proceedings in which the appellant is being prosecuted for assault, and the second being enforcement proceedings in the District Court arising out of a determination order of the Residential Tenancies Board, on the grounds that: the trial judge was quite correct in her comments about the form of the proceedings as they stood at the time of the application before her, and with regard to the substance of the applicant's complaints, she was clearly completely aware of those and took them into account in her judgment; and the trial judge did not exceed the legitimate exercise of her discretion in coming to the view that an appeal was a more suitable alternative remedy.  
Court of Appeal, in proceedings challenging the procurement process of the Minister for Transport in awarding a contract for aviation services, dismisses an appeal of the dismissal of a discovery application in the High Court, on the grounds that the appellant had failed to establish any significant error in the order of the High Court, or any injustice arising therefrom.  
Court of Appeal, in proceedings brought on foot of three special summonses seeking well charging orders over the homes of each defendant, considers the issue of whether the trial judge wrongly refused to allow the defendants to cross-examine the bank's deponent on his affidavit, and dismisses appeals, on the grounds that: the defendants had seven months to consider whether they wanted to cross-examine, and could have elected to do so without leave, but instead they agreed with the bank’s estimate of a two day trial on affidavit; and therefore it is difficult to see how any complaint of unfairness to the defendants can legitimately be made, even had they disclosed a basis for the cross examination sought.