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.
Detention on foot of contempt of court was lawful
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
Court of Appeal, in habeas corpus proceedings, dismisses appeal of High Court order that an appellant who was held in contempt of court (arising from his failure to engage with debt recovery proceedings in the District Court) was in lawful detention, on the grounds that: a) it was unconscionable that the High Court was not informed by the appellant, or by anybody on behalf of the appellant, that there had been multiple hearings before the District Court, and that constituted an abuse of process; b) judicial review was a more appropriate remedy, and fair procedures were afforded to the appellant at all times; and c) there was no defects in the warrant, and an argument in relation to the constitutionality of the legislation was not properly before the High Court.
Contempt – appeal of High Court order that appellant was in lawful detention – inquiry under Article 40.4.2 of the Constitution of Ireland – contempt of court contrary to s.6 of the Summary Jurisdiction (Ireland) Amendment Act 1871 – contempt of court contrary to s.6 of the Summary Jurisdiction (Ireland) Amendment Act 1871 – abuse of the process – appropriateness of the Article 40 procedure – fair procedures – alleged defects in the warrant – Constitutional challenge – decision on the merits – “The Law of Habeas Corpus in Ireland” (2006) (Four Courts Press: Dublin), Dr Kevin Costello – it was unconscionable that the High Court was not informed by the appellant, or by anybody on behalf of the appellant, that there had been multiple hearings before the District Court – “Contempt of Court and other offences and torts involving the administration of justice” (LRC IP 10-2016) – no grounds of appeal upheld – appeal 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.
