Cullen v Toibin

JurisdictionIreland
JudgeMr. Justice Barrington
Judgment Date01 January 1984
Neutral Citation1984 WJSC-HC 237
Docket NumberNo. 8271P/1983
CourtHigh Court
Date01 January 1984

1984 WJSC-HC 237

No. 8271P/1983
CULLEN v. TOIBIN & MAGIL PUBLICATIONS
JOHN CULLEN
PLAINTIFF

AND

COLM TOIBIN AND MAGILL PUBLICATIONS (HOLDINGS)LIMITED
DEFENDANTS
1

Judgment of Mr. Justice Barringtondelivered the 2nd day of December, 1983.

2

This is an application for an Interlocutory Injunction to restrain publication in the Defendants magazine "Magill" of an article concerning the Plaintiff while his appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal is pending. The first-named Defendant is the editor and they second-named Defendants are the publishers of the saidmagazine.

3

The Plaintiff was convicted in the Central Criminal Court of the murder of one Dolores Lynch and of malicious damage to property and was on the 17th day of November, 1982 sentenced to penal servitude for life on the first count and to fifteen years penal servitude on the second.

4

He applied for a Certificate of Leave to Appeal which wasrefused. He immediately appealed against this refusal and his appeal is still pending before the Court of Criminal Appeal.

5

I have not seen the transcript of the proceedings in the Central Criminal Court but have been told by Mr. Mackey, who appeared for Mr. Cullen in the criminal proceedings, and also appears for him in these proceedings, that the only evidence against Mr. Cullen was the uncorroborated evidence of an alleged accomplice one Miss Elizabeth Madden. I am also informed by Mr. Mackey, and I accept, that the trial judge, in his charge, warned the jury that there was no corroboration for Miss Madden's evidence and that, while they could convict on her uncorroborated evidence, it would be dangerous to do so.

6

The grounds of appeal set out in Mr. Cullen's Notice of Appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal against the refusal of the certificate are asfollows:-

7

1. The uncorroborated evidence of an accomplice is insufficient in law to sustain a conviction.

8

2. The uncorroborated evidence of an accomplice, of otherwise bad character, whose untrustworthiness as a witness to thetruth, has been established in evidence, is insufficient to sustain aconviction.

9

3. The uncorroborated evidence of an accomplice of otherwise bad character, whose untrustworthiness as a witness to the truth has been established in evidence, and who has been granted immunity from prosecution in relation to the offence as charged against the accused in which she was an accomplice, is insufficient to sustain aconviction.

10

4. The verdict of the jury cannot be supported by the evidence.

11

5. The jury failed to give any or any proper consideration to the directions in law of the Learned Trial Judge as to the danger of convicting on the uncorroborated evidence of Elizabeth Madden.

12

The publishers of "Magill" entered into an exclusive contract with Elizabeth Madden to publish an article, based on material supplied by her, in the forthcoming issue of Magill magazine. The Plaintiff seeks to restrain the publication of this article.

13

I have read the article which is a lengthy one. It is written with verve, and is, I am prepared to accept for the purpose of this application, a serious piece of investigativejournalism written about matters which may be thought to be legitimate objects of public interest and concern. But it is essentially Miss Madden's story written for her by a talented journalist. It deals with her life and background, her relations with Mr. Cullen, issues of guilt or innocence in relation to the offences charged, and with Mr. Cullen's background, character, psychological make-up and mode of living. It contains many serious and prima facie defamatory allegations. It touches on many matters some of which were given in evidence at the trial and some of which, according to Mr. Mackey were not. It purports to enter into Miss Madden's mind...

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 cases
  • DPP v Tobin
    • Ireland
    • Court of Criminal Appeal
    • 22 June 2001
    ...IR 465 KELLY V O'NEILL 2000 ILRM 507 CONSTITUTION ART 38 JURIES ACT 1976 S15(3) JURIES ACT 1976 S20 JURIES ACT 1976 S21 CULLEN V O'BEIRNE 1984 ILRM 577 R V GOUGH 1993 AC 646 WEBB V THE QUEENB 1994 181 CLR O'NEILL V BEAUMONT HOSPITAL 1990 ILRM 419 O'REILLY V CASSIDY 1995 1 ILRM 306 DUBLIN......
  • Irish Times Ltd v Ireland
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 2 April 1998
    ...organs of public opinion. These rights included the right to report the news as well as the right to comment on it. Cullen v. ToibínDLRM [1984] ILRM 577 and Heaney v. IrelandDLRM [1997] 1 ILRM 117, Attorney General for England and Wales v. Brandon Books Publishing Ltd.IR [1986] I.R. 597 con......
  • Hunter & Callaghan v Gerald Duckworth & Company Ltd & Blom-Cooper
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 31 July 2003
    ...OF CALIFORNIA V JOHNSON-SMITH 1972 1 QB 522 KELLY V O'NEILL & BRADY 2000 1 IR 354 2000 1 ILRM 507 2000/11/4219 CULLEN V TOIBIN 1984 ILRM 577 KEARNEY V MIN JUSTICE 1986 IR 116 MILLS V ALABAMA 384 US 214 (1966) TERMINIELLO V CHICAGO 337 US 1 1949 CHAPLINSKY V NEW HAMPSHIRE 315 US 568 (1941)......
  • Kelly v O'Neill
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 2 December 1999
    ...CONOR BRADY RESPONDENTS/APPELLANTS Citations: AG V TIMES NEWSPAPERS LTD 1974 AC 273 CULLEN V TOIBIN & MAGILL PUBLICATIONS (HOLDINGS) LTD 1984 ILRM 577 CONSTITUTION ART 40.6 R V DAVIES EX-PARTE DELBERT-EVANS 1945 KB 435 LAW REFORM COMMISSION CONSULTATION PAPER ON CONTEMPT OF COURT (1991) ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
4 books & journal articles
  • The Relevane of Constitutional Rights to the Granting of an Interlocutory Injunction
    • Ireland
    • Hibernian Law Journal No. 12-2013, January 2013
    • 1 January 2013
    ...supra note 80, p.16 83 Martin, Hanbury and Martin: Modern Equity , 18th edn (London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2009), p.824 84 Cullen v Toibín [1984] ILRM 577 85 Ibid, pp.581–582. The Supreme Court unanimously overturned the order of Barrington J who had granted the injunction in the High Court. 04 ......
  • Broadcasting regulation in Ireland: regulation built on a false premise
    • Ireland
    • Hibernian Law Journal No. 10-2011, January 2011
    • 1 January 2011
    ...Grand Chamber Judgment of 23 September 1994, at para.31 81 Cogley v R.T.É. [2005] 4 I.R. 79 (HC) at 83 82 Ibid 83 See Cullen v Tóibín [1984] I.L.R.M. 577 (SC) at 785, per O’Higgins CJ “the freedom of the press and of communication which is guaranteed by the Constitution … cannot be lightly ......
  • Does Expression Have Any Freedom Left? Murphy v. Independent Radio and Television Commission
    • Ireland
    • Trinity College Law Review No. I-1998, January 1998
    • 1 January 1998
    ...General v. Paperlink Ltd. [1984] ILRM 373. 7 Nova Media Ltd v. Minister for Posts and Telegraphs [1984] ILRM 161; Cullen v. Toibin [1984] ILRM 577; Attorney General for England and Wales v. Brandon Book Publishers Ltd [1987] ILRM 135. 128 Trinity College Law Review [Vol. I Freedom of Expres......
  • Some reflections on the law of contempt
    • Ireland
    • Irish Judicial Studies Journal No. 2-2, July 2002
    • 1 July 2002
    ...even if it was, in my view, unduly optimistic. However, the balance shifted in Kelly v. O’Neill16where the 14[1965] I.R. 70. 15[1984] I.L.R.M. 577. 16[2001] 1 I.R. 95 Judicial Studies Institute Journal [2:2 Supreme Court17had to deal with the issue of publication of information prejudicial ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT