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, in personal injuries proceedings arising from a so-called 'tiger kidnapping' incident involving the plaintiff, hears plaintiff's application for discovery and production of three categories of documentation relating to the defendant's security measures, procedures and training at material times and grants such discovery and production, on grounds that: the defendant's objection based on public interest privilege and national security concerns is not made out where some of the documentation reflects a prior policy of the defendant which has since been superseded and updated; and the court is satisfied that if the plaintiff is denied discovery of such relevant documentation, she will be significantly hampered in making out that part of her claim which relates to the defendant's security apparatus and procedures at the time of the alleged injuries.
Discovery - public interest privilege - personal injuries proceedings - tiger kidnapping incident - nature of allegations made against defendant from whom discovery is sought - liability comprehensively denied - O.31, r.12 RSC - postmasters manual and other security manuals - records of inspection/supervision of security installations at post office - security procedures booklet - parties' submissions - test of relevance and necessity - treatment of 'confidential' documents in discovery applications - sensitivity of documents sought - risks of disclosure - national security grounds - privilege - public interest privilege - inspection and production of documentation sought - whether a claim of public interest privilege defeated a claim for discovery and production - principles relating to public interest privilege - implementation of public interest principles - text of disputed documentation - relevant to claim - plaintiff significantly hampered in making her case if discovery not granted - discovery necessary for fair disposal of case - booklet does not attract public interest privilege - restriction on sight of documentation to parties and their legal teams/expert witnesses
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