McCullough v Ireland
| Jurisdiction | Ireland |
| Court | High Court |
| Judge | Mr. Justice Barron |
| Judgment Date | 16 March 1989 |
| Neutral Citation | 1989 WJSC-HC 1888 |
| Docket Number | No. 7668p/1979,[1979 No. 7668P] |
| Date | 16 March 1989 |
1989 WJSC-HC 1888
THE HIGH COURT
Citations:
CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 1961 S48(6)
MOYNIHAN V GREENSMYTH 1977 IR 55
CIVIL LIABILITY ACT 1961 S9(2)
RSC O.15 r13
RSC O.15 r14
Synopsis:
LIMITATION OF ACTIONS
Parties
Substitution - Plaintiff - Personal injury - Action - Death - Executor made plaintiff - Executor plaintiff made additional claim against defendants on behalf of dependants of deceased - Dependants" claim statute barred - Held that the claim made by the plaintiff pursuant to s. 48 of the Act of 1961 was statute barred both as regards her own dependency and that of her infant child: ~Moynihan v. Greensmyth~ [1977] I.R. 55 considered - Civil Liability Act, 1961, s. 48 - (1979/7668 P - Barron J. - 16/3/89)
|McCullough v. Ireland|
PRACTICE
Parties
Substitution - Plaintiff - Personal injury - Action - Death - Executor made plaintiff - Executor plaintiff made additional claim against defendants on behalf of dependants of deceased - Dependants" claim statute barred - ~See~ Limitation of Actions, parties - Civil Liability Act, 1961, s. 48 - (1979/7668 P - Barron J. - 16/3/89)
|McCullough v. Ireland|
Judgment of Mr. Justice Barrondelivered the 16th day of March 1989.
These proceedings were commenced on the 23rd November 1979 as an action for damages for personal injuries received by the husband of the present Plaintiff. The Statement of Claim setting out his claim was delivered on the 27th February 1981. Particulars were sought by the Defendants by letter dated 24th April 1981. Thomas McCullough died on the 19th June 1981. No steps were taken on behalf of his estate until the 1st May 1985 when the particulars requested in 1981 were furnished. His widow appears to have been substituted as Plaintiff and by Order dated 21st December 1987 she was given liberty to amend the proceedings by including a claimfor damages pursuant to the provisions of Part IV of the Civil Liability Act 1961. In its defence to the amended pleadings, the Defendants rely upon the provisions of Section 48 (6) of the same Act to defeat the amendedclaim.
Since this defence gives rise to questions of law upon the basis of admitted facts, the following issues have been directed. Whether or not the alleged cause or causes of action arose within the three years before this action and/or before the same were added to the original action herein by Order of the High Court made on...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
-
Gannon Maguire v O'Callaghan
...by the appellant and noted that Moynihan was consistently followed in a number of subsequent judgments, including, McCallough v. Ireland [1989] I.R. 484; Keane v. Western Health Board [2006] IEHC 283 and [2006] IEHC 370, [2007] 2 I.R. 555: and Prendergast v. McLaughlin [2009] IEHC 250. [201......
-
MaGuire v O'Callaghan
...plaintiff. Indeed, Moynihan v. Greensmyth has been consistently followed in a number of subsequent decisions – see McCullough v. Ireland [1989] I.R. 484, Keane v. Western Health Board [2006] I.E.H.C. 283 and [2007] 2. I.R. 555 and Prendergast v. McLoughlin [2011] 1. I.R. 18 Counsel for the ......