IELCA 23 - Lopes -v- Minister for Justice Equality and Law Reform

• Year: 2018
• Decision Date: 11 December 1988

1

[2018] IELCA 23

THE HIGH COURT

2007 2370 P

BETWEEN

ANTONIO CASIMIRO LOPES

PLAINTIFF

AND

THE MINISTER FOR JUSTICE EQUALITY AND LAW REFORM

DEFENDANT

RULING ON DEFENDANT’S COSTS OF DEFENDING THE ACTION IN

THE HIGH COURT

1. By Plenary Summons dated 26 March 2007 the Plaintiff set out at length the basis upon which

he was seeking certain reliefs against the Defendant and to which I will shortly refer. A

Statement of Claim was subsequently delivered which in essence repeated the matters

pleaded in the Plenary Summons.

2. The Defendant’s response to the Plaintiff’s Action was to issue a Notice of Motion seeking inter

alia-:

“1. An Order pursuant to order 19 Rule 28 of the Rules of the Superior Courts

dismissing or, alternatively, striking out the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant on

the grounds that it discloses no reasonable cause of action against the Defendant and

is shown by the Pleadings to be frivolous and/or vexatious.

2. Further or in the alternative, an order pursuant to the inherent jurisdiction of the

Court dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant as being an abuse of

process of this Court and/or as having no reasonable prospects of success and/or

being bound to fail.

3. Further or in the alternative, an order pursuant to Order 19 Rule 27 of the rules of

the Superior Courts dismissing or alternatively striking out the Plaintiff’s claim as being

scandalous.”

3. The Plaintiff’s Action was struck out by Order of the High Court dated 11 June 2008 (Hanna J.)

with Costs to the Defendant which Order was affirmed by the Supreme Court following upon

the hearing by that Court on 18 June 2015, of the Plaintiff’s Appeal against the said Order of

Hanna J.