Melling v O Mathghamhna

CourtSupreme Court
Docket Number(1959. NO. 333 P.)
Judgment Date01 Jan 1963
JurisdictionIreland
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
54 cases
  • Murphy v GM PB PC Ltd and GH
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 4 June 1999
    ...IR 136 OZTURK V GERMANY 1984 6 EHRR 409 BENDENOUN V FRANCE 1994 18 EHRR 54 BENHAM V UNITED KINGDOM 1996 22 EHRR 293 MELLING V O MATHGHAMHNA 1962 IR 1 AG V CASEY 1930 IR 163 GETTINS, STATE V FAWSITT 1945 IR 183 AG V SOUTHERN INDUSTRIAL TRUST LTD & SIMONS 1960 94 ILTR 161 CONSTITUTION A......
  • Keating v Crowley and Others
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 9 October 2002
    ...VIOLENCE ACT 1996) 2000 SI 104/2000 MCDONALD V BORD NA GCON (NO 2) 1965 IR 217 CONSTITUTION ART 40 MELLING V O MATHGHAMHNA & ANOR 1962 IR 1 HEANEY V IRELAND 1996 1 IR 580 CHILD CARE ACT 1991 S17 R (MARTIN) V MAHONY 1910 2 IR 695 KILLEEN V DPP 1997 3 IR 218 Synopsis: FAMILY LAW Const......
  • Criminal Assets Bureau v Murphy
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 27 February 2018
    ...106 It was in this context that McGuinness J., having considered in some detail the decision of this Court in Melling v O Mathghamhna [1962] I.R. 1, referred at p. 217 of the report to the argument of counsel for the State defendants that proceedings under the Act were, strictly speaking, ......
  • Enright v Ireland
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 18 December 2002
    ... 2000 2 IR 360 HARRIS LAW OF THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS 1995 274 CONSTITUTION ART 38.2 MELLING V O MATHGHAMHNA & AG 1962 IR 1 O'KEEFFE V FERRIS 1997 2 ILRM 161 COMPANIES ACT 1963 S297 ROAD TRAFFIC ACT 1961 S49 PHEASANTRY LTD V DONNELLY 1982 ILRM 512 CARTMILL V IRELAND 198......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
4 books & journal articles
  • Bearing a Constitutional Cross: Examining Blasphemy and the Judicial Role in Corway v. Independent Newspapers
    • Ireland
    • Trinity College Law Review Nbr. III-2000, January 2000
    • 1 January 2000
    ...22, at 22. 59 Attorney General v. Hamilton (No. 1) [1993) 2 IR 250; [1993] ILRM 81; In re Haughey [1971] IR 217; Melling v. 6 Mathghamhna [1962] IR 1. 60 For an equivalent argument in the context of general judicial interpretation, see Dicey, "Law and Public Opinion" in Lectures o......
  • Selectivity in prosecution in the district court
    • Ireland
    • Irish Judicial Studies Journal Nbr. 2-9, July 2009
    • 1 July 2009
    ...only to minor offences, without _____________________________________________________ * Judge of the District Court, LL.M. Public Law. 1[1962] I.R. 1. 2 [1965] I.R. 411. 3 [1984] I.R. 248, at 260. 4 [1996] 1 I.R. 517 2009] Selectivity in Prosecution 27 definition, and to their exemption fro......
  • The summary trial of indictable offences
    • Ireland
    • Irish Judicial Studies Journal Nbr. 2-4, July 2004
    • 1 July 2004
    ...offence fit to be tried summarily, but without giving guidance as to how the court should form its opinion. 17 Melling v. Ó Mathghamhna [1962] I.R. 1 18 Conroy v. Attorney General [1965] I.R. 411 (H.C. & S.C.). 19See The State (Rollinson) v. Kelly [1984] I.R. 248 (S.C.). The Summary Tri......
  • Summary v. Indictable: choices in the disposal of criminal cases
    • Ireland
    • Irish Judicial Studies Journal Nbr. 1-6, January 2006
    • 1 January 2006
    ...of an accused or other aggravating circumstances might suggest that the sentencing _____________________________________________________ 8[1962] I.R. 1 (S.C.). 9[1965] I.R. 411 (S.C.). 2006] Summary v. Indictable 23 option available in the District Court would be inadequate.10By way of cont......