Waldron v Honorable Society of Kings Inns

JurisdictionIreland
JudgeJUSTICE T.C. SMYTH
Judgment Date16 March 2004
Neutral Citation[2004] IEHC 602
CourtHigh Court
Date16 March 2004

[2004] IEHC 602

THE HIGH COURT

297JR/2003
WALDRON v. HONORABLE SOCIETY OF KINGS INNS
DUBLIN
CIARAN WALDRON
Applicant
-and-
THE HONORABLE SOCIETY OF KING”S INNS
Respondent
-and-
THE HONORABLE SOCIETY OF KING”S INNS EDUCATION COMMITTEE
First Named Notice Party
-and-
THE HONORABLE SOCIETY OF KING”S INNS EDUCATION APPEALS BOARD
Second Named Notice Party

Citations:

RAJAH V ROYAL COLLEGE OF SURGEONS 1994 1 IR 384

CORRIGAN V IRISH LAND COMMISSION 1977 IR 317

COUNCIL FOR CIVIL SERVICES UNION V MIN CIVIL SERVICE 1985 1 AC 374

RSC O.84 r21(1)

RUSSELL V DUKE OF NORFOLK 1949 1 AER 109

KIELY V MIN SOCIAL WELFARE 1977 IR 267

MURPHY V TURF CLUB 1989 IR 171

BEIRNE V COMMISSIONER OF AN GARDA SIOCHANA 1993 ILRM

Synopsis:

JUDICIAL REVIEW

Fair procedures

Education - Admission to course - Requirements for admission - Whether applicant bound by changes in rules governing students introduced after he commenced course - Introduction of entrance exams - Whether breach of natural justice - Whether relationship based on contract - Whether sufficient public law aspect to application - Rajah v Royal College of Surgeons [1994] 1 I.R. 384 followed - Rules of the Superior Courts 1986 (SI 15/1986), O 84, r 21(1) - Application refused (2003/297JR - Smyth J - 16/3/2004) [2004] IEHC 125

Waldron v King's Inns

Facts: The applicant sought an order of certiorari by way of an application for judicial review quashing a decision of the first named notice party purporting to prohibit the applicant from attending law lectures and tutorials being provided by the respondent at their law school and removing his name from the register of the Honourable Society of King's Inns and a decision of the second named notice party purporting to refuse the applicant's exemption to be required to sit the entrance examination for admittance to the Degree course. The applicant alleged that the said notice parties acted ultra vires their powers and breached natural and constitutional justice by requiring the applicant to compete and sign an admission form for part II of the Diploma course, and thereby acknowledging that his entry to the degree course would be by way of competitive entrance examination.

Held by Smyth J. in dismissing the application: That the impugned decisions of the first named notice party were not ultra vires. Furthermore, the decisions were not made in breach of the principles of natural and constitutional justice. There was no illegality, irrationality or procedural impropriety in the decision of the second named notice party. The applicant knew or ought to have known in 1999 that if he did not obtain a Diploma in Legal Studies by 2001 he would be required to pass a competitive entrance examination prior to being accepted for the Degree course. There was no lack of fairness or want of natural or constitutional justice towards the applicant. He exercised his right of appeal and he was given the opportunity to present his case.

Reporter. L. 0'S.

1

JUSTICE T.C. SMYTH ON TUESDAY, 16TH MARCH 2004

2

I hereby certify the following to be a true and accurate transcript of my shorthand notes of the evidence in the above-named action.

APPEARANCES

For THE APPLICANT

MR. WALDRON SELF-REPRESENTED

For THE RESPONDENT

MR. M. COLLINS SC MR. BARNIVILLE BL

Instructed by:

JOHN O”CONNOR O”CONNOR 8 CLARE STREET DUBLIN 2

3

COPYRIGHT: Transcripts are the work of Gwen Malone Stenography Services and they must not be photocopied or reproduced in any manner or supplied or loaned by an appellant to a respondent or to any other party without written permission of Gwen Malone Stenography Services

MR. JUSTICE SMYTH:

On 28th April 2003 O'Donovan J. granted relief

4

to apply for judicial review to the Applicant for the following reliefs:

5

2 "1. Certiorari by way of application for judicial review against the Respondent for decisions made by the First Named Notice Party on both the 14th October 2002 and 9th December 2002, which decision purported to prohibit and prevent the Applicant herein from attending law lectures and tutorials being provided by the Respondent at their law school at Henrietta Street, Dublin 1 and to have the Applicant's name removed from the register of the Honorable Society of the King's Inns.

6

2. Certiorari by way of application for judicial review of a decision made by the Second Named Notice Party on behalf of the Respondent on 15th January 2003 at the Benches room, Four Courts, Dublin, which Board dismissed the Applicant's appeal against the decision of the First Named Notice Party made on 14th October 2002 and furthermore purported at this stage to refuse the Applicant's exemption to be required to sit for the entrance examination for admittance to the Degree of Barrister at Law.

7

3. Prohibition by way of application for judicial review of an anticipated decision by the Respondent to prohibit and prevent the Applicant from sitting his second year annual examination in Diploma II at the Honorable Society of King's Inns in May 2003.

8

4. Declaratory relief by way of application for judicial review that the decisions made by the First and Second Named Notice Parties shall not have effect and that same be quashed pending the final determination of these judicial reviews proceedings.

9

5. Stay on the decisions of the Respondent and the First and Second Named Notice Parties herein until the final determination of these judicial review proceedings.

10

6. Costs".

11

The grounds upon which relief was sought and granted are as follows:

"Grounds for relief in relation to the application for Certiorari:
12

1. The First Named Notice Party acted ultra vires their powers when that Committee made a decision on 14th October 2002 at a meeting of the Education

13

Committee to reconsider the Applicant's entitlement to attend law lectures and tutorials of the Honorable Society of King's Inns, Law School unless the Applicant herein completed Form 5 in the format as laid down by the Honorable Society of King's Inns.

14

The First Named Notice Party failed to consider the implications of their actions and indeed ignored the decision by the Council of the King's Inns made at their meeting on 25th January 2001 in response to a Petition of the Applicant.

15

The First Named Notice Party did not provide any advance notice or indeed any form of notice to the Applicant that matters pertaining to the Applicant's student status or ability to attend lectures would be determined or raised in discussion before the Education Committee on 14th October 2002 and, furthermore, the First Named Notice Party failed to allow the Applicant herein to attend and be heard at this meeting of the Committee which would allow the Applicant to provide reasons as to why he should not be compelled to complete Form 5 in its present format.

16

The First Named Notice Party sought to compel the Applicant to complete Form 5 by means of duress and unlawful sanctions with the ultimate sanction being the threat of withdrawal of the Applicant's right and contractual entitlement to attend lectures at the Respondent's premises and to participate in his class tutorials, even though the Applicant had paid lecture and examination fees for the academic year 2002/03 in the sum of €4,000 to the Respondent at their request on 30th September 2002. Therefore, the Respondent had a contractual agreement with the Applicant to provide such law lectures.

17

The First Named Notice Party at its meeting on 9 th December 2002 made the decision that if the Applicant failed to return Form 5 duly completed in the Society's format to the Society before 6 th January 2003, then the Applicant would not be allowed to attend lectures and would be taken off the King's Inns register.

18

The decision of the First Named Notice Party dated 9 thDecember 2002 was made without notice and in the absence of the Applicant and without affording the Applicant the right to attend the meeting and discuss and provide his reasons to the Education Committee for not completing Form 5 in the Society's format, since the Applicant felt that should he complete Form 5 then he would be acknowledging that he had no right to an exemption from sitting the entrance examination to the Degree of Barrister at Law.

19

The First Named Notice Party acted ultra vires their powers in reaching their decision on 9th December2002 and breached the Applicant's constitutional rights to access to education and the right to be heard in advance of any hearing which would purport to restrict or curtail the Applicant's right to access to education and be treated equally and, furthermore, the First Named Party acted in breach of fair procedures and the principles of natural justice in refusing and failing to allow the Applicant to receive a hearing before the Education Committee on either 14th October 2002 or on 9th December 2002.13 The First Named Notice Party prior to both its meetings on 14 thOctober 2002 and 9 th December 2002 failed to properly or fully appraise itself of the history, correspondence and decisions made in respect of the Applicant by the Honorable Society of King's Inns or, indeed, request the Director of Education to provide and circulate copies of the Applicant's papers in advance of these two meetings before making a decision which would have serious consequences for the Applicant's legal education and ability to sit his second year examinations.

20

The First Named Notice Party made their decision on 9 thDecember 2002 in spite of the fact that on 5 th December 2002 the Director of Education allowed the Applicant herein an extension of time until Wednesday, 11 th December 2002 to reply and address matters raised in the Director of Education's letter dated 15 th October 2002 to make submissions to the Education Committee in advance of any final decision in relation to my right to attend...

To continue reading

Request your trial

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