Lavery v DPP

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Mr. Justice Richard Humphreys
• Judgment Date: 26 February 2020
• Neutral Citation: [2020] IEHC 150
• Docket Number: [2016 No. 228 JR]
• Court: High Court
• Date: 26 February 2020

BETWEEN

JOSEPH LAVERY

APPLICANT

AND

THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

RESPONDENT

(NO. 4)

[2020] IEHC 150

Richard Humphreys J.

[2016 No. 228 JR]

THE HIGH COURT

JUDICIAL REVIEW

Isaac Wunder order – Contempt – Expenses – Applicant seeking orders placing two judges of the District Court in contempt and an order for expenses relating to the motion – Whether the application was scandalous and vexatious

Facts: The applicant, Mr Lavery, was made the subject of an Isaac Wunder order on 4th July, 2016 in Lavery v. D.P.P. [2016 No. 228 JR]. In accordance with that order, he applied to the High Court for permission to issue an application which was set out in an unstamped draft ex parte docket dated 24th February, 2020 and entitled in the 2016 No. 228 JR proceedings. That ex parte docket claimed, as substantive relief to be obtained ex parte, orders placing two judges of the District Court in contempt and an order for expenses relating to the motion, as well as other relief. The applicant moved on foot of an affidavit sworn on 24th February, 2020. The affidavit complained that criminal proceedings against the applicant were adjourned in May, 2016 and February, 2017, notwithstanding a stay granted by the High Court.

Held by the Court that there were a number of independent reasons why this application must fail: (i) it was scandalous and vexatious, thereby reinforcing the case for the Isaac Wunder order; (ii) the proposed application disclosed no statable ground for relief and certainly not the relief actually sought; (iii) the application was not made in a timely manner; and (iv) the remedy sought was not relief that could be obtained ex parte and, thus, the procedure adopted by way of looking for substantive relief (as opposed to leave to seek such relief) by ex parte docket was inappropriate.

The Court held that permission to apply pursuant to the Isaac Wunder order on foot of the proposed ex parte docket would be refused.

Permission refused.

JUDGMENT of Mr. Justice Richard Humphreys delivered on the 26th day of February, 2020

1 The applicant over a period of the last decade has been involved in a dozen sets of proceedings mainly revolving around his complaints against Gardaí together with knock-on complaints against judges and other public authorities with whom he has come into contact. Those cases, many of which have given rise to written judgments, have been as follows:

(i). Lavery v. McBride [2012 No. 746 JR] (see Lavery v. McBride [2016] IESCDET 132; Lavery v. McBride [2018] IEHC 299 (Unreported, High Court, 30th April, 2018));

(ii). Lavery v. McBride [2013 No. 682 JR];

(iii). Lavery v. McBride [2014 No. 301 JR];

(iv). Lavery v. McBride [2015 No. 4819 P];

(v). Lavery v. D.P.P. [2015 No. 619 JR] (see Lavery v. D.P.P. (No. 1) [2016] IEHC 866 (Unreported, High Court, 21st December, 2016); Lavery v. D.P.P. (No. 3) [2018] IEHC 185 (Unreported, High Court, 13th March, 2018));

(vi). Lavery v. D.P.P. [2016 No. 228 JR] (see Lavery v. D.P.P. (No. 2) [2016] IEHC 322 (Unreported, High...