RAS Medical Ltd, t/a Park West Clinic v The Royal College of Surgeons Ireland

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Clarke C.J.,MacMenamin J.,Dunne J.
• Judgment Date: 02 February 2018
• Neutral Citation: [2018] IESCDET 26
• Court: Supreme Court
• Date: 02 February 2018

[2018] IESCDET 26

THE SUPREME COURT

DETERMINATION

Clarke C.J.

MacMenamin J.

Dunne J.

BETWEEN

RAS MEDICAL LIMITED, T/A PARK WEST CLINIC

APPLICANT/RESPONDENT

AND

THE ROYAL COLLEGE OF SURGEONS IRELAND

RESPONDENT/APPLICANT

APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL TO WHICH ARTICLE 34.5.3° OF THE CONSTITUTION APPLIES

RESULT: The Court grants leave to the Applicant to appeal to this Court from the Court of Appeal.

REASONS GIVEN:

ORDER SOUGHT TO BE APPEALED

COURT: Court of Appeal

DATE OF JUDGMENT OR RULING: 31st July 2017

DATE OF ORDER: 5th October 2017

DATE OF PERFECTION OF ORDER: 12th October 2017

THE APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL WAS MADE ON 8th NOVEMBER 2017 AND WAS IN TIME.

General Considerations

1 The general principles applied by this Court in determining whether to grant or refuse leave to appeal having regard to the criteria incorporated into the Constitution as a result of the 33rd Amendment have now been considered in a large number of determinations and are fully addressed in both a determination issued by a panel consisting of all of the members of this Court in B.S. v Director of Public Prosecutions (2017) IESCDET 134 and in a unanimous judgment of a full Court delivered by O'Donnell J. in Price Waterhouse Coopers (A Firm) v Quinn Insurance Ltd. (Under Administration) [2017] IESC 73. The additional criteria required to be met in order that a so-called “leapfrog appeal' direct from the High Court to this Court can be permitted were addressed by a full panel of the Court in Wansboro v Director of Public Prosecutions (2017) IESCDET 115. It follows that it is unnecessary to revisit the new constitutional architecture for the purposes of this determination.

2 Furthermore the application for leave filed and the respondent's notice are published along with this determination (subject only to any redaction required by law) and it is therefore unnecessary to set out the position of the parties.

3 In that context it should be noted that the respondent opposes the grant of leave.

Decision

4 As appears from the documents filed in relation to this application for leave to appeal, the central issue which the applicant (‘The Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland’) seeks to raise on this appeal concerns the manner in which a central fact of particular importance to this case was determined in the courts below, and in particular by the Court of Appeal. It is, of course, correct that it...