Mooney v Dublin Corporation

JurisdictionIreland
Judgment Date01 January 1934
Date01 January 1934
CourtHigh Court (Irish Free State)
Mooney
and
Dublin Corporation
[H. C., I. F. S.]

Soliciting - "Maim" - Garda Siochana - Compensation - Grand Jury (Ir.) Act, 1836 (6 7 Wm. IV., c. 116), s. 106 - Dublin Police Act,1842 (5 6 Vict., c. 24), s. 14 (11).

Immediately after a member of the Garda Siochana had given evidence against a prisoner whom he had arrested and charged with loitering and soliciting, the prisoner slashed him with a razor so as to permanently disfigure him and incapacitate him for work for a considerable time. On a claim for compensation the Court held, reversing the Circuit Court Judge, that the injuries did no amount to a "maim.""Soliciting" is no such conduct as tends to lend to a breach of the peace.

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • Foley v Corporation of Dublin
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • January 1, 1940
    ......Held on appeal, applying the definition of "maim"adopted by Palles, C.B., in English v. Kerry County CouncilDLTR, 34 ILTR. 76, and followed in Mooney v. Dublin CorporationDLTRIR, 68 ILTR. 243; [1939] I.R. 520, as "such a hurt of any part of a man's body whereby he is rendered less able, in fighting, either to defend himself, or to annoy his adversary," that the injuries suffered by the applicant amounted to maiming within the meaning of the ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT