A.S. v R.B.

JurisdictionIreland
Judgment Date01 January 1984
Date01 January 1984
Docket Number[1981 No. 8350P]
CourtHigh Court
(H.C.)
A.S
and
R.B

Evidence admissible to prove paternity - Evidence of wife that child not the child of the marriage - Whether admissible - Rule in Russell v. Russell - Whether part of the common law of Ireland - Whether incompatible with the provisions of the Constitution -Constitutional entitlement to fair procedures -Obligations of the Registrar of Births and Deaths - Constitution of Ireland, 1937, Arts. 34.1, 38.1, 40.3, 50 - Registration of Births and Deaths (Ireland) Act, 1863 (c. 11) - Births and Deaths Registration Act (Ireland), 1880 (c. 13), s. 7 -Guardianship of Infants Act, 1964 (No. 7), ss.6(4), 11(4).

A.S., the first named plaintiff, wife of the first named defendant (W.S.), sought an order declaring that the second named plaintiff (R.B.) with whom she had lived, was the father of a male child born during her marriage to W.S. and for an order directing the name of R.B. be registered by the Registrar General as father of the infant. W.S. elected not to defend the proceedings and the Registrar General sought formal proof of paternity and pleaded the presumption of law that the father of the child was W.S. The proceedings were amended to include a claim for the appointment of the plaintiffs (A.S. and R.B.) as guardians of the infant. The plaintiffs (A.S. and R.B.) and W.S. sought to establish paternity by oral evidence of A.S. relating to non-access at the relevant time and counsel for the Registrar General drew the attention of the court to the Rule in Russell v. RussellELR [1924] A.C. 687 i.e. the rule of law excluding evidence of non-access by husband or wife tending to prove the illegitimacy of the child born during their marriage. Counsel for the plaintiffs contended that this rule never became part of the law of the State or if it did that it was no longer part of the law due to incompatibility with the Constitution and the requirements of public policy. Medical evidence indicated that W.S...

To continue reading

Request your trial
16 cases
  • O.R v an tArd Chláraitheoir
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • November 7, 2014
    ...semper certa est as an irrebuttable presumption is consistent with fair procedures under the Constitution. The judgment of O'Hanlon J. in S. v. S., relating to the irrebuttable presumption in certain cases relating to paternity within marriage, is ample authority to enable the court to conc......
  • W v W
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • January 1, 1993
    ...v S [1984] ILRM 86. T O’G v Attorney General [1985] ILRM 61. Gray v Formosa [ 1963] P 259. Lord Advocate v Jaffrey [1921] 1 AC 146. S v S [1983] IR 68. AS v RB, WS and Registrar General [1984] ILRM 66. Spaight v Dundon [1961] IR 201. State (Director of Public Prosecutions) v Walsh [1981] IR......
  • M.R and Another v an tArd Chlaraitheoir and Others
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • March 5, 2013
    ...HEALTH BOARD & ORS 1997 3 IR 511 1998 1 ILRM 241 1998/7/1838 CONSTITUTION ART 40.1 S (A) & v S (W) & REGISTRAR GENERAL OF BIRTHS & DEATHS 1983 IR 68 1984 ILRM 66 1983/4/1063 RUSSELL v RUSSELL 1924 AC 687 CONSTITUTION ART 37 STATUS OF CHILDREN ACT 1987 S35 STATUS OF CHILDREN ACT 1987 S35(1......
  • S (I)(A Minor) & S (A)(A Minor) v Min for Justice and Others
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • January 21, 2011
    ...1973 IR 238 MURPHY v DUBLIN CORP & MIN FOR LOCAL GOVT 1972 IR 215 1973 107 ILTR 65 S (A) & v S (W) & REGISTRAR GENERAL OF BIRTHS & DEATHS 1983 IR 68 1984 ILRM 66 1983/4/1063 BLEHEIN v MIN FOR HEALTH & ORS 2009 1 IR 275 2008 2 ILRM 401 2008/3/594 2008 IESC 40 PESCA VALENTIA LTD v MIN FOR FIS......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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