Tracey v Independent Newspapers (Ireland) Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Mr. Justice John MacMenamin
• Judgment Date: 30 July 2019
• Neutral Citation: [2019] IESC 69
• Date: 30 July 2019
• Court: Supreme Court
• Docket Number: [Record No. 457/2011] [High Court Record No. 2008/11104P]

BETWEEN:

KEVIN TRACEY

PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT

V.

INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPERS (IRELAND) LIMITED, PHILIP MOLLOY, PAUL DUNNE, GERRY O'REGAN, MICHAEL DENIEFFE

DEFENDANTS/RESPONDENTS

[2019] IESC 69

MacMenamin J.

MacMenamin J.

Dunne J.

Peart J.

[Record No. 457/2011]

[Court of Appeal Record No. 2014/327]

[High Court Record No. 2008/11104P]

THE SUPREME COURT

High Court order – Re-hearing – Article – Appellant seeking to appeal against High Court order – Whether the High Court’s order should stand

Facts: These proceedings related to an article which was published on the 17th September, 2017, in the Irish Independent. The article was headed “Man assaulted neighbour over children’s game”. The statement of claim set out much material regarding correspondence, and a proposed clarification which the appellant, Mr Tracey, wished to have published. The correspondence also set out that Mr Tracey wished to have payment of the sum of €1,500,000 before the 23rd October, 2008. The article contained the statement that Mr Tracey had been “convicted of assault another neighbour”. The Irish Independent offered clarification in relation to the phrase “convicted” of assault, although asserting that the District Judge had, in fact, referred to the fact that the order under the Probation of Offenders Act 1907 would be a conviction.

Held by the Supreme Court (MacMenamin J) that the background to these proceedings bore strong resemblances to the judgment delivered in the case of Tracey v Irish Times Limited & Others, High Court Record No. 2008/11101P, Supreme Court Record No. 454/2011. MacMenamin J held that while certain elements of the background to this case were distinct, the essential considerations, for the purposes of this application, remained the same, viz. whether the High Court’s order should stand. MacMenamin J held that, for the reasons set out in the Irish Times judgment, the High Court order should not stand.

MacMenamin J held that he would, therefore, remit this motion to the High Court for re-hearing, again subject to the same observations as contained in the Irish Times judgment.

Appeal allowed.

Judgment of Mr. Justice John MacMenamin dated the 30th day of July, 2019

Background

1 The background to these proceedings again bears strong resemblances to the judgment delivered today in the case of Tracey v. Irish Times Limited & Others, High Court Record No. 2008/ 11101P, Supreme Court Record No. 454/2011 (‘ Irish...