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.
Proceedings against State defendants are precluded by the doctrine of res judicata
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court, in proceedings concerning the property provisions of family legislation, grants the State defendants' motion to dismiss the proceedings, on the grounds that: the plaintiff has raised identical issues in previous sets of proceedings, and therefore the issues in the amended Statement of Claim are, save for a reference to the Charter of Fundamental Rights, precluded by the doctrine of res judicata; and, insofar as the reliance on the Charter is concerned, the proceedings are barred by the rule in Henderson v. Henderson as an abuse of process, where it was sought to reargue by reference to the Charter points previously determined by reference to the Constitution, and in circumstances where the Charter had not been in force at the time the provisions impugned had been applied to the plaintiff.
Two separate motions - plaintiff’s motion to amend his plenary summons and statement of claim - first, second and third named defendants’ (“the State Defendants”) motion to dismiss the proceedings on the basis that: (1) They disclose no cause of action; (2) The issues raised herein are res judicata; (3) The proceedings are an abuse of process; and (4) The proceedings are frivolous and/or vexatious - identical issues raised in previous sets of proceedings - the doctrine of res judicata - the rule in Henderson v. Henderson - abuse of process.
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.
