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 |
Supreme Court allows an appeal from the High Court, and determines that a plaintiff was entitled to issue a plenary summons to seek a declaration that a State body (the Child and Family Agency) was in contempt of court for failing to comply with a High Court order to provide a special care placement for a vulnerable child. The original decision by the High Court, which found that the contempt application should have been brought under specific procedural rules, was overturned. The Supreme Court clarified that a simple declaration of contempt without a penal endorsement is permissible in plenary proceedings, especially when no punitive measures are sought. Despite allowing the appeal, the Court refrained from making further orders due to the placement of the child in special care and the lack of a full evidential basis for a contempt finding.
Child and Family Agency (CFA), contempt of court, Supreme Court, High Court, special care order, Child Care Act 1991, plenary summons, jurisdiction, declaration of contempt, procedural rules, Rules of the Superior Courts (RSC), Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, statutory duties, vulnerable children, ADHD, child trauma, rule of law, democracy, constitutional commitment.
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 fast reporting service for all Irish judgments over the past ten years. Click here to request a subscription.
Register Now