O'Neill v Governor of Castlerea Prison

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Keane C.J.
• Judgment Date: 01 April 2004
• Neutral Citation: 2004 WJSC-SC 9109
• Court: Supreme Court
• Docket Number: [S.C. No. 186 of 2003]
• Date: 01 April 2004

MICHAEL O'NEILL & JOHN QUINN v. GOVERNOR OF CASTLEREA PRISON & ORS

BETWEEN

MICHAEL O'NEILL AND JOHN QUINN

APPELLANTS/APPLICANTS

AND

THE GOVERNOR OF CASTLEREA PRISON, THE MINISTER FOR JUSTICE, EQUALITY AND LAW REFORM AND THE GOVERNMENT OF IRELAND

RESPONDENTS

2004 WJSC-SC 9109

186/03

THE SUPREME COURT

Synopsis:

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

Setting aside

Supreme Court - Order setting aside judgment of Supreme Court - Order correcting error in judgment of Supreme Court - Whether breach of natural justice - Whether applicant denied opportunity of dealing with argument at hearing - Constitution of Ireland, Article 34 (186/2003 - Supreme Court - 1/4/2004)

O'Neill v Governor of Castlerea Prison - [2004] 1 IR 319

Facts: The applicants applied for an order setting aside the judgment of the Supreme Court and alternatively an order pursuant to Article 34 of the Constitution correcting an error in the judgment. The applicant contended that he had no opportunity of dealing with a particular argument at the Supreme Court hearing and therefore that there had been a breach of natural justice.

Held by the Supreme Court (Keane CJ, Denham, Murray, McGuinness and McCracken JJ) in dismissing the application that the case was not even remotely within the category of exceptional circumstances where a grave breach of natural justice had unwittingly occurred and the applicant was entitled to invoke the exceptional jurisdiction of the court to re-open the matter.

Reporter: R.W.

Citations:

CONSTITUTION ART 34.4.6

GREENDALE DEVELOPMENTS LTD (NO 3), RE 2000 2 IR 514

BULA LTD V TARA MINES LTD (NO 1) 1987 IR 85

NORTHERN IRELAND "GOOD FRIDAY AGREEMENT" (1998)

1 1st day of April 2004, by Keane C.J.

Keane C.J.

2 This is an application on behalf of the applicants for an order setting aside the judgment of this court delivered on the 29 ^th day of January, 2004 and alternatively, an order pursuant to Article 34 correcting an error in the judgment of the court delivered on that day.

3 The court, in considering that application, applies the principles adopted and made clear in relatively recent years as to the circumstances in which this court will regard itself as having the jurisdiction to set aside a judgment in a case already given. Article 34.4.6 of the Constitution provides that

"The decision of the Supreme Court shall in all cases be final and conclusive."

4 In Greendale Developments Ltd. and,...