Doherty -v- MJELR & Ors,  IEHC 246 (2009)
|Docket Number:||2007 9400 P|
|Party Name:||Doherty, MJELR & Ors|
THE HIGH COURT2007 9400 PBETWEENDANIEL DOHERTYPLAINTIFFANDTHE MINISTER FOR JUSTICE, EQUALITY AND LAW REFORM ANDJOHN HEDIGAN OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS ANDJOHN L. MURRAY OF THE SUPREME COURT ANDJOSEPH FINNEGAN OF THE SUPREME COURT ANDRICHARD JOHNSON OF THE HIGH COURT ANDPAUL CARNEY OF THE HIGH COURT ANDKEVIN O'HIGGINS OF THE HIGH COURT ANDFREDERICK MORRIS OF THE HIGH COURT ANDMATTHEW DEERY OF THE CIRCUIT COURT ANDMICHAEL WHITE OF THE CIRCUIT COURT ANDJOSEPH MATTHEWS OF THE CIRCUIT COURT ANDMIRIAM MALONE OF THE DISTRICT COURT ANDJOHN O'DONNELL OF THE DISTRICT COURT ANDTOM FITZPATRICK OF THE DISTRICT COURT ANDSEAN MCBRIDE OF THE DISTRICT COURT ANDANNIE MCGINLEY, ASSISTANT COUNTY REGISTRAR FOR COUNTY DONEGAL ANDGERALDINE O'CONNOR, REGISTRAR FOR COUNTY DONEGAL, ANDVAL CRONIN OF THE DISTRICT COURT IN DONEGAL ANDTHE LAND REGISTRY ANDTHE BAR COUNCIL OF IRELAND ANDTHE LAW SOCIETY OF IRELANDTHE COMMISSIONER OF AN GARDA SIOCHÁNA ANDCATHERINE CLANCY ANDNOEL V. WHITE ANDTHE CRIMINAL ASSETS BUREAU ANDTHE GARDA OMBUDSMAN ANDJOHN LONERGAN ANDDAN SCANNELL ANDTONY KILBANE ANDTHE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS ANDTHE COURTS SERVICE ANDTHE MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE ANDMARTINA KEARNEY ANDKIERAN LYNCH ANDTHE MINISTER FOR FINANCE ANDLIAM IRWIN ANDANN HERRITY ANDKIERAN O'CONNELL ANDBERTIE AHERN ANDJAMES MCDAID ANDCECELIA KEAVENEY ANDTHE IRISH HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSIONDEFENDANTS JUDGMENT of Mr. Justice Brian McGovern delivered on the 15th day of May 2009 1. The plaintiff has sued the numerous defendants in this action and sets out his claims in a statement of claim running to some thirty pages. I have been informed that his action against the following defendants has been struck out or discontinued: The Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, Hugh Orde, The Rev. Ian Paisley and Martin McGuinness. The remaining defendants have brought motions to strike out the plaintiff's statement of claim. The applications are grounded upon O. 19, r. 27 of the Rules of the Superior Courts and/or the inherent jurisdiction of the court on the grounds that the statement of claim is prolix and/or contains pleadings which are unnecessary or scandalous but which may tend to prejudice, embarrass or delay the fair trial of this action; an order pursuant to O. 19, r. 28 of the Rules of the Superior Courts and/or the inherent jurisdiction of the court striking out the plaintiff's statement of claim and/or these proceedings on the grounds that they are vexatious and/or that the statement of claim discloses no reasonable cause of action; an order striking out those parts of the plaintiff's claim against the first to the fifteenth named defendants as relate to their actions as judges on the ground that same disclose no reasonable cause of action as the said claims are made in respect of acts of the said defendants in the exercise of their jurisdiction.2. The plaintiff, for his part, has brought motions for judgment in default of defence against the defendants. When the motions came on for hearing before me, I adjourned the motions for judgment in default of defence pending the outcome of...
To continue readingREQUEST YOUR TRIAL