Tobin v Minister for Defence
Jurisdiction | Ireland |
Judge | Clarke C.J.,MacMenamin J.,Charleton J. |
Judgment Date | 17 December 2018 |
Neutral Citation | [2018] IESCDET 202 |
Court | Supreme Court |
Date | 17 December 2018 |
[2018] IESCDET 202
THE SUPREME COURT
DETERMINATION
Clarke C.J.
MacMenamin J.
Charleton J.
AND
COURT: Court of Appeal |
DATE OF ORDER: 9th July, 2018 |
DATE OF PERFECTION OF ORDER: 27th September, 2018 |
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.
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.
In that context it should be noted that the respondent opposes the grant of leave.
As can be seen from the notices referred to earlier, the issue with which this potential appeal is concerned relates to discovery. Orders for the disclosure of documents in the context of civil litigation are commonplace, and issues arising in that context could not meet the threshold of ‘matter of general public importance’ or ‘interests of justice’ which would justify granting leave to appeal to this Court. The application of well-established principles to...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Tobin v Minister for Defence
...potentially arise on this appeal and it was for that reason that in a determination of this Court ( Tobin v. The Minister for Defence [2018] IESCDET 202) leave to appeal was granted. In doing so, the Court noted that:- ‘…it appears to this Court that there is a question of general public im......