White v Sunday Newspapers Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: O'Donnell J.,McKechnie J.,Dunne J.
• Judgment Date: 13 February 2017
• Neutral Citation: [2017] IESCDET 16
• Court: Supreme Court
• Date: 13 February 2017

[2017] IESCDET 16

THE SUPREME COURT

DETERMINATION

O'Donnell J.

McKechnie J.

Dunne J.

BETWEEN

PAUL WHITE

PLAINTIFF

AND

SUNDAY NEWSPAPERS LIMITED

DEFENDANT

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:

1. Jurisdiction

1 This determination concerns an appeal brought by the defendant/applicant (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Applicant’) from the judgment of the Court of Appeal delivered ex tempore on the 4th November, 2016 and the Order made on the 7th December, 2016 and perfected on the 8th December, 2016. As is clear from the terms of the Constitution and many determinations made by this Court since the enactment of the Thirty Third Amendment, it is necessary, in order for this Court to grant leave, that it be established that the decision sought to be appealed either involves a matter of general public importance, or that it is otherwise in the interests of justice necessary that there be an appeal to this Court.

2 The Court considers it desirable to point out that a determination of the Court on an application for leave, while it is final and conclusive so far as the parties are concerned is a decision in relation to that application only. The issue is whether the questions raised, and the facts underpinning them meet the constitutional criteria for leave. It will not, save in the rarest of circumstances, be appropriate to rely on a refusal of leave as having a precedential value in relation to the substantive issues in the context of a different case. Where leave is granted, any issues upon which leave has been granted to appeal to this Court will in due course be disposed of in the substantive decision of the Court.

2. The proceedings

3 These proceedings the plaintiff/respondent (hereinafter referred to as ‘Mr. White’) sought damages for defamation arising out of an article and photograph published by the Applicant on page 26 of the Sunday World newspaper on the 26th May 2013 which wrongly contained a photograph of Mr. White. Mr. White claims that the article was grossly defamatory of him and suggested that he had been shot five times by a hitman, that he has enemies who wish him dead, that he is an associate of dissident republicans and members of the organisation styling itself as the Real IRA and that he is an associate of notorious criminals, amongst other things.

4 By letter dated the 31th May, 2013, the Applicant made an offer to make amends pursuant to s. 22 of the Defamation Act 2009 (‘the Act of 2009’) offering to publish a correction and apology and further offering to pay such sum of compensation or damages and such costs as may be agreed or determined.

5 The offer to make amends was accepted by Mr. White. The parties have not been able to agree terms of the offer of amends. An application for directions for the conduct of an application for a determination under paragraph...