Behan v The Medical Council

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Mr. Justice Morris
• Judgment Date: 01 January 1993
• Neutral Citation: 1992 WJSC-HC 3131
• Docket Number: [1990 No. 5674P],No. 5674p/1990
• Court: High Court
• Date: 01 January 1993

1992 WJSC-HC 3131

THE HIGH COURT

No. 5674p/1990

BEHAN v. MEDICAL COUNCIL

IN THE MATTER OF A JUDICIAL REVIEW

AND IN THE MATTER OF A PLENARY HEARING

BETWEEN

JAMES BEHAN

PLAINTIFF

AND

THE MEDICAL COUNCIL AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

DEFENDANTS

Citations:

RSC O.19 r7(1)

MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS ACT 1978 S45(3)

WEINBERGER V INGLIS 1918 1 CH 133

MANN V CELBRIDGE SPINNING CO LTD 1967 IR 1

CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 1961

Synopsis:

PRACTICE

Pleadings

Particulars - Sufficiency - Motion - Plaintiff - Defendant's exhaustive particulars - Plaintiff aware of defendant's case - Motion for further and better particulars dismissed - Rules of the Superior Courts, 1986, order, 19, r. 7; order 84, r. 26 - (1990/5674 P - Morris J. - 23/10/92) [1993] 3 I.R. 523 1993 ILRM 240

|Behan v. The Medical Council|

1 Judgment of Mr. Justice Morrisdelivered the 23rd day of October, 1992

2 This is an application brought by the Plaintiff seeking an Order against the first named Defendant pursuant to Order 19 Rule 7(1) directing it to give further and better particulars to the Plaintiff. The letter for particulars is dated the 23rd of April 1992. The background to this case is of importance in considering the issues which arise. The Plaintiff is a Consultant Psychiatrist. One of his patients considered that he had behaved in an unprofessional manner and made a complaint to the Medical Council which matter came before The Fitness to Practice Committee for an inquiry into the Plaintiff's conduct. Upon the Committee communicating with the Plaintiff, he questioned a number of matters relating to the inquiry which the Committee proposed to carry out, and took issue with the holding of such an inquiry. However on the 5th of February 1990 the Plaintiff received notice of the holding of an inquiry by the Committee in accordance with Section 45(3) of the Medical Practitioners Act 1978. The Plaintiff thereupon sought and obtained anOrder for Judicial Review and an Order staying the holding of the inquiry. He delivered his Statement of Claim pursuant to this Order in which he set out in a comprehensive manner the facts of the case and the complaints which he had as to the manner in which the first named Defendants have conducted themselves in this transaction. To this Statement of Claim the first named Defendant entered a Defence which, with the exception of paragraphs 2 and 3 (in which the facts are admitted) and paragraph 4 (in which a complaint about the Plaintiff's delay is made) the entire thereof, which runs to 24 paragraphs, constitutes a direct traverse and denial of the Plaintiff's claim as set out in his Statement of Claim and no more.

3 The Defence having delivered by the first named Defendant on the 13th of July 1990, on the 23rd of April 1992 the Plaintiff served a Notice for Particulars which runs to 152 paragraphs and a number of these paragraphs are themselves sub-divided into sub-paragraphs. In considering the time gap...