Attorney General v O'Kelly
| Jurisdiction | Ireland |
| Judgment Date | 20 March 1928 |
| Date | 20 March 1928 |
| Court | High Court (Irish Free State) |
Comments on observations made by Judge on the conduct of jury - Scandalising the Court - Motion to attach -Jurisdiction of High Court - Powers conferred by the Constitution - Constitution of the Irish Free State (Saorstát Eireann) Act, 1922 (No. 1 of 1922), Sch. I., Arts. 2, 64, 72, 73 - Courts of Justice Act, 1924 (No. 10 of 1924), s. 17.
The High Court of Justice of the Irish Free State has jurisdiction to commit for contempt of Court, neither Art. 72 nor any other Article of the Constitution having deprived it of that jurisdiction. So held by the High Court (Sullivan, P., Meredith and Hanna, J.J.). Per Sullivan, P.: Committals for contempt of Court by scandalising the Court itself have not become obsolete, and the dictum to the contrary in McLeod v. St. Aubyn,ELR [1899] A. C. 549, cannot be accepted as accurate, having regard to the subsequent decisions,R. v. Gray,ELR [1900] 2 Q. B. 36, and R. v. Editor of the New Statesman,UNK 44 T. L. R. 301. On an application by the Attorney-General for an order for attachment against the Editor of a newspaper for contempt of Court for causing to be printed and published certain statements which...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Murphy v British Broadcasting Corporation
...STATE V MCRANN 1977 IR 78 DOBSON V HASTINGS 1992 ALL ER 394 CHIEF CONSTABLE OF LEICESTERSHIRE V GARAVELLI 1997 EMLR 543 AG V O'KELLY 1928 IR 308 CONSTITUTION ART 38.1 CONSTITUTION ART 40.3 DPP, STATE V WALSH 1981 IR 412 CONSTITUTION ART 35.2 SHANNON REGIONAL FISHERIES BOARD V CAVAN CO CO......
-
State (Commins) v McRann
...the issue of contempt of court and to impose sanctions in the event of disobedience to their orders. The Attorney General v. O'KellyIR [1928] I.R. 308: In re EarleIR [1938] I.R. 485 and The Attorney Generalv. ConnollyIR [1947] I.R. 213 approved. 2. That in the case of civil contempt the rea......
-
DPP v Independent Newspapers (Ireland) Ltd and Others
...of the Respondents..." 13 10. The judgment of O'Sullivan P, in the High Court of the Irish Free State, in Attorney General v O'Kelly [1928] I.R. 308 traced common-law authorities back to the eighteenth century. It was, according to Wilmot C.J. a power to `fine and imprison for contempt of c......
-
Connelly v Wallace and Others
...(7) 4 H. & N. 712. (8) 8 A. & E. 449. (9) [1919] 1 I. R. 227. (10) 6 L. R. (Ir.) 455. (11) 10 Q. B. 359. (12) 39 I. L. T. R. 221. (13) [1928] I. R. 308. (14) [1905] 2 I. R. (15) [1912] 2 I. R. 374. (16) [1910] 2 K. B. 244. (17) 6 C. B. 363. (18) 21 Q. B. D. 362. (1) [1895] 1 Ch. 37. (2) L. ......
-
Some reflections on the law of contempt
...an inescapable conclusion that, if in 78Although there might possibly be an equality argument. 79[1981] I.R. 412. 80[1981] I.R. 412. 81[1928] I.R. 308. 82[1947] I.R. 121 Judicial Studies Institute Journal [2:2 1937 it was intended to depart from that understanding of the nature of the crimi......
-
Criticising judges in Ireland
...in R. v. Gray [1900] All E.R. 59 and R. v. The Editor of the New Statesman [1928] 44 Times L.R. 301, in Attorney General v. O’Kelly [1928] I.R. 308 at 8[1928] I.R. 308 at 331. 84 Judicial Studies Institute Journal [2:1 administration of justice, and the preservation of public peace and orde......