R McG v S McG

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Mr. Justice Henry Abbott
• Judgment Date: 24 July 2015
• Neutral Citation: [2015] IEHC 491
• Docket Number: [2013 No. 48 CAF]
• Court: High Court
• Date: 24 July 2015

BETWEEN

R. MCG.

APPLICANT

AND

S. MCG.

RESPONDENT

[2015] IEHC 491

[2013 No. 48 CAF]

THE HIGH COURT

FAMILY LAW

Family law – Practice & Procedures – Request for digital records – O. 123 of the Rules of the Superior Courts – Judicial review of High Court order

Facts: The applicant sought an order for the release of the digital audio recordings or transcripts of the hearing in the subject case for the stated purpose to seek judicial review of the said order of the High Court.

Mr. Justice Henry Abbott refused to grant an order for the release of the digital recordings or transcripts of the hearing in the subject case. The Court observed that it had discretionary powers to direct the access of the records to the parties to the proceedings under o 123 of the Rules of the Superior Courts. The Court, however, held that its orders or decisions were not amendable to judicial review. The Court observed that since the High Court and other Superior Courts were vested with inherent jurisdiction to review the orders, decisions of the Courts inferior to them, as such the High Courts and other Superior Courts, could not be subjected to judicial review.

JUDGMENT of Mr. Justice Henry Abbott delivered on the 24th day of July, 2015.

1 This application is grounded upon the notice of motion issued by the respondent to the above mentioned proceedings, sworn on the 15th June, 2015, wherein he seeks the following reliefs:-

‘1. An order releasing to the respondent the digital audio recordings or transcripts of the hearing in the above case heard by this Honourable Court on 7th May, 2014, (Ms Justice O'Hanlon) and on 27th February, 2015, (Mr Justice Abbott).

2. Such further or other reliefs as this Honourable Court deems suitable’

2 The respondent furnished to this Court an affidavit wherein he made clear the purposes for which the digital audio recording was sought and were contained at paragraph 2 of the said affidavit in the following terms:-

‘I require the D.A.R. and/or transcripts of the hearings in my case on 7th May, 2014, (Ms Justice O'Hanlon) and on 27th February, 2015, (Mr Justice Abbott) as I intend to seek a judicial review of the decisions made on both dates. I urgently require the D.A.R.s and/or transcripts to be in a position to fairly prosecute my application for judicial review.’[sic]

3 The court has jurisdiction to make directions so to release any extract from the digital audio recording database in the form of transcripts to either or all parties to proceedings under Order 123 contained within the Rules of the Superior Courts. Order 123, implemented by S.I. No. 325 of 2008 and amended by S.I. No. 101 of 2013 and S.I. No. 485 of 2014 is cited for the convenience of the parties as follows:-

‘2. At the trial or hearing of any cause or matter, any party may, with the Court's permission and subject to and in accordance with any direction of the Court, make or cause to be made a record of the proceedings, which record shall (subject, in the case of criminal proceedings, to rule 14(2) of Order 86) include:-

(a) the oral evidence;

(b) in the case of an action tried by a Judge and jury, the Judge's charge and directions to the jury, and the submissions and requisitions made to the judge and his ruling thereon;

(c) in any case tried by a Judge without a jury, the Judge's judgment (unless it be a written judgment).

3. At the hearing of any inquiry as to damages or other proceedings by the Master, any party may, with the Master's permission and subject to any order or direction of the Master, make or cause to be made a record of the proceedings in such case, which record shall include:-

(a) any oral evidence;

(b) any speech or submissions by counsel or solicitor;

(c) the Master's judgment (unless it be a written judgment), and Order 36, rule 44 shall not apply in any such case.

4. The party making or causing to be made a record in a case referred to in rule 2 or rule 3 shall pay the cost of the production of the record and, where any transcript is required, the cost of the production of such transcript and the said payment shall be borne by the said party unless the Judge or the Master (as the case may be) shall after the trial or hearing certify that in his opinion it...