Digital Rights Ireland Ltd v Min for Communication and Others

JurisdictionIreland
JudgeMr. Justice William M. McKechnie
Judgment Date05 May 2010
Neutral Citation[2010] IEHC 221
CourtHigh Court
Docket Number[2006 No. 3785 P]
Date05 May 2010
Digital Rights Ireland Ltd v Min for Communication & Ors
DIGITAL RIGHTS IRELAND LIMITED
Plaintiff
-and-
THE MINISTER FOR COMMUNICATION, MARINE AND NATURAL RESOURCES, THE MINISTER FOR JUSTICE, EQUALITY AND LAW REFORM, THE COMMISSIONER OF AN GARDA SIOCHANA,IRELAND AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
Defendants
-and-
THE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION
Notice Party

[2010] IEHC 221

Record No.:3785P/2006

THE HIGH COURT

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

Personal rights

Privacy - Company - Business transactions - Right to marry - Right to communicate - Right to travel - Whether corporate body having personal rights - Whether narrower than rights of natural persons - Caldwell v Mahon [2006] IEHC 86, [2007] 3 IR 542 and Copland v UK (App. 62617/00) (Unrep, ECHR, 3/4/2007) followed - Constitution of Ireland, 1937, Article 40 - European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1951, articles 8 and 12 - Plaintiff granted locus standi -(2006/3785P - McKechnie J - 5/5/2010) [2010] IEHC 221

Digital Rights Ireland Ltd v Minister for Communications

EUROPEAN UNION

Reference to European Court of Justice

Questions to be referred - Validity of Council Directive 2006/24/EC - Whether legal and factual context of case properly defined - Whether reference premature - Whether exceptions to requirement to make reference - Irish Creamery Milk Suppliers Association v Ireland (Cases C-36 and C-71/80) [1981] ECR 735 applied - Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Article 267 - Question referred (2006/3785P - McKechnie J - 5/5/2010) [2010] IEHC 221

Digital Rights Ireland Ltd v Minister for Communications

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

Locus standi

Sufficient interest - Actio popularis - Personal rights - Privacy - Business dealings - Whether bona fide interest - Whether "common" interest in subject matter - Whether standing for non-natural entity to assert personal rights - Whether company can assert right to privacy, family life, travel and communication - Whether standing issue determined as preliminary issue - Cahill v Sutton [1980] IR 269, SPUC v Coogan [1989] IR 735, Irish Penal Reform Trust Ltd v Governor of Mountjoy Prison [2005] IEHC 305, (Unrep, Gilligan J, 2/9/2005), Crotty v An Taoiseach [1987] IR 713, Lancefort Ltd v An Bord Pleanála (No 2) [1999] 2 IR 270 and R v Secretary of State for Transport, ex parte Factortame (Case C-213/89) [1990] ECR I-2433 followed; Construction Industry Federation v Dublin City Council [2004] IEHC 37, [2005] IESC 16, [2005] 2 IR 496 distinguished - Criminal Justice (Terrorist Offences) Act 2005 (No 2), s 63(1) - Constitution of Ireland, 1937, Articles 40.3.1 , 40.3.2 and 40.6.1 - Council Directive 2006/24/EC - European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1951, articles 8 and 12 - Plaintiff granted locus standi (2006/3785P - McKechnie J - 5/5/2010) [2010] IEHC 221

Digital Rights Ireland Ltd v Minister for Communications

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

Security for costs

Criteria in determining application - Delay - Whether "special circumstances" exist - Whether European element special circumstance - Lancefort Ltd v An Bord Pleanála [1998] 2 IR 511, Village Residents Association Ltd v An Bord Pleanála (No 2) [2000] 4 IR 321, Peppard and Co Ltd v Bogoff [1962] IR 180 and Dublin Int Arena v Waterworld Ltd [2007] IESC 48, [2008] 1 ILRM 496 applied - Companies Act 1963 (No 33), s 390 - Security for costs refused (2006/3785P - McKechnie J - 5/5/2010) [2010] IEHC 221

Digital Rights Ireland Ltd v Minister for Communications

Facts: The plaintiff was a limited liability company that sought to promote and protect civil and human rights in the context of modern communication technologies. The plaintiff alleged that the defendants had wrongfully exercised control over data and that Criminal Justice Terrorist Offences) Act 2005 was invalid on the grounds of EU and ECHR law and that Directive 2006/24/EC, on the retention of data generated or processed in connection with the provision of publicly available electronic communications services or public communications networks, ("Data Retention Directive") was also invalid as a matter of EU law. The proceedings related to the locus standi of the corporate plaintiff alleging rights to privacy, family and marital privacy and travel rights, security for costs and whether a preliminary reference was appropriate to resolve the questions raised in the proceedings by referring questions to the Court of Justice pursuant to Article 267 TFEU.

Held by McKechnie J. that the Court would grant the plaintiff locus standi to bring an actio popularis as to whether the impugned provisions had violated the company's right to privacy and communications but not as to family and marital privacy or travel. The defendants' motion for security for costs would be refused and the Court would grant the motion of the plaintiff for a preliminary reference to the Court of Justice pursuant to Article 267 TFEU. The challenged was to specific legislation and the Court could not rule on the validity of Community law.

Reporter: E.F.

CRIMINAL JUSTICE (TERRORIST OFFENCES) ACT 2005 S63(1)

HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION ACT 2000 S4

HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION ACT 2000 8(H)

TREATY ON THE FUNCTIONING OF THE EUROPEAN UNION ART 267

TREATY ON THE FUNCTIONING OF THE EUROPEAN UNION ART 234

POSTAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES ACT 1983 S110(1)

INTERCEPTION OF POSTAL PACKETS & TELECOMMUNICATION MESSAGES (REGS) ACT 1993

EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (DATA PROTECTION & PRIVACY IN TELECOMMUNICATIONS) REGS 2002 SI 192/2002

CRIMINAL JUSTICE (TERRORIST OFFENCES ) ACT 2005 PART 7

EEC DIR 1995/46

EEC DIR 1997/66

EEC DIR 2002/58

EEC DIR 2006/24 ART 1

CONSTITUTUIN ART 40.3.1

CONSTITUTION ART 40.3.2

CONSTITUTION ART 40.6.1

CONSTITUTION ART 6(1)

CONSTITUTION ART 6(8)

CONSTITUTION ART 6(10)

CRIMINAL JUSTICE TERRORIST OFFENCES ACT 2005 S63(1)

TREATY ON THE EUROPEAN UNION 6(1)

TREATY ON THE EUROPEAN UNION 6(2)

TREATY ON THE EUROPEAN UNION 3 A

TREATY ON THE FUNCTIONING OF THE EUROPEAN UNION ART 21

TREATY OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY ART 10

TREATY OF EUROPEAN COMMUNITY ART 18

CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ART 7

CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ART 8

CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ART 11

CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ART 41

TREATY ON THE EUROPEAN UNION ART 5

IRELAND v EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT & COUNCIL OF EUROPEAN UNION C-301/06 UNREP ECJ 06.07.2006

CAHILL v SUTTON 1980 IR 269

NORRIS v AG 1984 IR 36

A G v PAPERLINK LTD 1984 ILRM 373

CALDWELL v MAHON 2007 3 IR 542

SPUC v COOGAN 1989 IR 743

L'HENRYENAT v IRL 1983 IR 193

CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY FEDERATION v DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL 2005 2 IR 496

SPUC v COOGAN 1989 IR 734

CROTTY v AN TAOISEACH 1987 1 IR 713

COPLAND v UK ECHR 3.04.2007 APP NO 62617/00 2007 ECHR 253

BLESSINGTON HERITAGE TRUST LTD v WICKLOW CO COUNCIL 1999 4 IR 571

LANCEFORT LTD v BORD PLEANALA & ORS NO.2 1999 2 IR 270

CONSTRUCTION CITY FEDERATION v DUBLIN CITY CO COUNCIL 2005 2 IR 496

R v INLAND REVENUE CMRS 1981 2 AER 93

CIF v DUBLIN CO COUNCIL

MARGUERITE JOHNSTON v CHIEF CONSTABLE OF THE ROYAL ULSTER CONSTABULARY C-222/84 1986 ECR 1651

VERHOLEN & ORS v SOCIALE VERZEKERINGSBANK AMSTERDAM C-87-89/90 1991 ECR I-3757

UINIBET LONDON LTD & UNIBET INT'L LTD v JUSTITIEKANSLERN C-432/05 2007 ECR I -2271

VAN SCHIJNEL v SPF C-430-1/93 1995 ECR I-4705

ADMINISTRAZIONE DELLE FINANZE v SAN GIOGIO C-107/82 1983 ECR 3595

QUEEN v SECRETARY OF STATE FOR TRANSPORT EXPARTE FACTORTAME LTD & ORS C-221/89 1990 ECR I-2433

IRISH PENAL REFORM TRUST LTD & ORS v GOVERNOR OF MOUNTJOY PRISON & ORS UNREP GILLIGAN 2.09.2005 2005/31/6440 2005 IEHC 305

IARNROD EIREANN v IRELAND 1996 3 IR 321

CONSTITUTION ART 40.3

EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS & FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS ART 8

EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS & FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS ART 10

CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ART 7

CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ART 8

CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ART 11

CHARTER OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ART 41

TREATY ON THE EUROPEAN UNION ART 3A

TREATY ON THE FUNCTIONING OF THE EUROPEAN UNION ART 21

TREATY ESTABLISHING THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY ART 10

TREATY ESTABLISHING THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY ART 18

TREATY ON THE EUROPEAN UNION ART 6(1)

TREATY ON THE EUROPEAN UNION ART 6(2)

KENNEDY v IRELAND 1987 IR 587

CALDWELL v MAHON 2007 3 IR 542

HAUGHEY v MORIARTY 1999 3 IR 1

BERNSTEIN v BESTER 1996 4 B.C.L.R (SA) 449

O'NEILL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS OF COMPANIES 2007 CH 15

HOECHST AG v COMMISSION 46/87 & 227/88 1989 ECR 2859

DOW BENELUX NV v COMMISSION C - 85/87 1989 ECR 3137

DOW CHEMICAL IBERICA SA v COMMISSION 97/87, 98/87 99/87 1989 ECR 3165

NIEMIETZ v GERMANY 1992 16 EHRR 97

EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS & FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS ART 8(2)

SOCIETE COLAS EST ORS v FRANCE 2002 ECHR 421

INTER ALIA CROQUETTE FRERES SA COMMISSION C-94/99 2002 ECR I-9011

MALAHIDE COMMUNITY COUNCIL LTD v FINGAL CO COUNCIL 1997 3 IR 383

IRISH TIMES v IRELAND 1998 1 IR 359

AG v PAPERLINK LTD 1984 ILRM 373

KENNEDY v IRELAND 1987 IR 587

DPP, PEOPLE v KENNY 1990 2 IR 110

DPP, PEOPLE v BYRNE 2003 4 IR 423

KANE v GOVERNOR OF MOUNTJOY PRISON 1988 IR 757

MALONE v UK 1984 7 EHRR 14

KLASS v GERMANY 1979-80 2 EHRR 214

M, STATE v AG 1979 IR 73

RYAN v AG 1965 IR 294

TREATY ON THE FUNCTIONING OF THE EUROPEAN UNION ART 20

TREATY ON THE FUNCTIONING OF THE EUROPEAN UNION ART 21

TREATY ON THE EUROPEAN UNION ART 17

TREATY ON THE EUROPEAN UNION ART 18

BAUMBAST & R v SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPT C-413/99 2002 ECR I - 7091

ZHU & CHEN v SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPT C-200/02 2004 ECR I-9925

TROJANI v CPAS C-456/02 2004 ECR I-07573

IRISH PENAL REFORM TRUST LTD v GOVERNOR OF MOUNTJOY PRISON & ORS UNREP GILLIGAN 2.9.2005 2005/31/6440 2005 IEHC 305

COMPANIES ACT 1963 S390

COMPANIES ACT 1908 S278

PEPPARD & CO LTD v BOGOFF 1962 IR 180

SEE CO LTD v PUBIC LIGHTING SERVICES 1987 ILRM 255

BEAUROSS LTD v KENNEDY UNREP...

To continue reading

Request your trial
22 cases
  • DPP v Dwyer
    • Ireland
    • Court of Appeal (Ireland)
    • 24 March 2023
    ...in Digital Rights Ireland Ltd v. Minister for Communications, where a plenary summons had issued on 11 th August 2006, McKechnie J. ( [2010] IEHC 221) decided to make a reference to the CJEU as to whether Directive 2006/24/EC of 15 th March 2006 (“the Data Retention Directive”) was compatib......
  • An Taisce The National Trust for Ireland v The Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage and Others
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 6 March 2024
    ...Decision is invalid; only the CJEU may do so. In Digital Rights Ireland v. Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources [2010] 3 I.R. 251, p. 300 (McKechnie J.), the Court was very clear that ‘the reference is required because [the Court is] unable to rule on the validity of [E......
  • Merriman v Fingal County Council
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 21 November 2017
    ...referred in this regard to the decision of the High Court (McKechnie J.) in Digital Rights Ireland Ltd v. Minister for Communications [2010] 3 I.R. 251. That was a case concerned, inter alia, with the locus standi of Digital Rights Ireland to bring a so-called " actio popularis", in effect......
  • Used Cars Importers Ireland Ltd v Minister for Finance
    • Ireland
    • Court of Appeal (Ireland)
    • 6 November 2020
    ...a bona fide concern or interest in the provisions sought to be impugned ( Digital Rights Ireland Ltd. v. Minister for Communications [2010] IEHC 221, [2010] 3 IR 251 at para. 48). It has most recently been expressed simply in terms of whether the impugned measure affects the plaintiff as a ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • If 'Mum' is the Word, is it the Law? Irish Privacy Law: A Comparative Perspective
    • Ireland
    • Trinity College Law Review No. XX-2017, January 2017
    • 1 January 2017
    ...the citizen, 16 and some cases have utilised 10 Kennedy v Ireland [1987] IR 587, 592. 11 Norris v Attorney General [1984] IR 36, 71. 12 [2010] IEHC 221; See also the South African position in Bernstein v Bester [1996] ZACC 2. 13 Kennedy (n 10) 593. 14 JC v DPP [2015] IESC 31 . 15 Kennedy (n......
  • The 2006 EC Data Retention Directive: A systematic failure
    • Ireland
    • Hibernian Law Journal No. 10-2011, January 2011
    • 1 January 2011
    ...front”, 4 March 2010, The Irish Times 217 Digital Rights Ireland v Minister for Communications, Marine, and Natural Resources & Ors [2010] I.E.H.C. 221 available at http://www.courts.ie/judgments.nsf/6681dee4565 ecf2c80256e7e0052005b/2182ac025ad64e1c8025777e0035e6e8?OpenDocument 218 per McK......

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