D.G. v Minister for Justice and Equality Ireland and the Attorney General

Court:Supreme Court
Judge:Clarke C.J., MacMenamin J., Dunne J.
Judgment Date:05 Feb 2018
Jurisdiction:Ireland
Neutral Citation:[2018] IESCDET 31

[2018] IESCDET 31

THE SUPREME COURT

DETERMINATION

Clarke C.J.

MacMenamin J.

Dunne J.

BETWEEN
D. G.
APPLICANT
AND
THE MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND EQUALITY, IRELAND

AND

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
RESPONDENTS

Leave to appeal – Constitutional threshold – Extension of time – Applicant seeking leave to appeal – Whether the point which arose met the constitutional threshold

Facts: The applicant applied to the Supreme Court seeking leave to appeal. In the application for leave, the applicant noted that the point she sought to raise on the application was effectively the same as that which arose in the case of MAK v Minister for Justice and Equality [2017] IESCDET 132; the Court granted leave to appeal in that case and also in a similar case being SE v Minister for Justice and Equality [2017] IESCDET 62. The respondents, the State, did not oppose the grant of leave in this case.

Held by Clarke CJ, MacMenamin J and Dunne J that the Court was satisfied that the point which arose in all of these cases was a point which met the constitutional threshold.

Clarke CJ, MacMenamin J and Dunne J held that the Court would grant leave to appeal on the same grounds as were the subject of leave in MAK. The Court directed that no steps should be taken on the appeal until the Court had an opportunity to give judgment in MAK; the case would then be put in before a case management judge to determine what should happen thereafter, having regard to the view on the relevant law which the Court took in MAK. With regards to the application for an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal, the Court noted that the State did not oppose that extension; in any event, the error which led to the delay in filing the application for leave was explained to the Court when the matter was mentioned in the context of consideration being given to the possibility of the case being expedited to be heard with MAK. In those circumstances, the Court granted an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal.

Application granted.

APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL TO WHICH ARTICLE 34.5.4° OF THE CONSTITUTION APPLIES
RESULT: The Court grants leave to the Applicant to appeal to this Court directly from the High Court.
REASONS GIVEN:
ORDER SOUGHT TO BE APPEALED
COURT: High Court
DATE OF JUDGMENT OR RULING: 27th October 2017
DATE OF ORDER: 27th October 2017
DATE OF PERFECTION OF ORDER: 27th October 2017
THE APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL WAS MADE ON 23rd JANUARY 2018 AND WAS NOT IN TIME.
General Considerations
1

The general principles applied by this Court in determining whether to grant or refuse leave to appeal having regard to the criteria incorporated into the Constitution as a result of the 33rd Amendment have now been considered in a large number of determinations and are fully addressed in both a determination issued by a panel consisting of all...

To continue reading

Request your trial