Wymes v Roche and Others

JurisdictionIreland
CourtHigh Court
JudgeMr. Justice Garrett Sheehan
Judgment Date26 Nov 2007
Neutral Citation[2007] IEHC 411

[2007] IEHC 411

THE HIGH COURT

[No. 7430 p/2007]
Wymes v Roche & Tierney

BETWEEN

MICHAEL J. WYMES
PLAINTIFF

AND

THOMAS J. ROCHE, MAURA TIERNEY AND CLAIRE ROCHE
DEFENDANTS

CONSTITUTION ART 41

EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS & FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS ART 8

CAHILL v SUTTON 1980 IR 269

LAWLOR v MEMBERS OF THE TRIBUNAL OF INQUIRY INTO CERTAIN PLANNING MATTERS & PAYMENTS UNREP O'NEILL 27.4.2007 2007 IEHC 139

O'CONNELL v CORK CORP 2001 3 IR 602 2001/19/5149

IRISH PENAL REFORM TRUST LTD & ORS v GOVERNOR OF MOUNTJOY PRISON & MIN FOR JUSTICE UNREP GILLIGAN 2.9.2005 2005/31/6440 2005 IEHC 305

PRACTICE & PROCEDURE

Strike out

Locus standi - Whether plaintiff could maintain claim to prevent contractual relations while wife subject to coercion and undue influence - Affidavit of wife indicating capacity and absence of undue influence - Affidavit of solicitor indicating consciousness of responsibility to wife - Whether maintenance of proceedings in breach of rights of wife - Cahill v Sutton [1980] IR 269; Lawlor v Planning Tribunal [2007] IEHC 139, (Unrep, O'Neill J, 27/4/2007); O'Connell v Cork Corporation [2001] 3 IR 602 and Irish Penal Reform Trust v Governor of Mountjoy [2005] IEHC 305, (Unrep, Gilligan J, 2/9/2005) distinguished - Constitution of Ireland 1937, article 41 - European Convention on Human Rights, article 8 - Claim struck out (2007/7430P - Sheehan J - 26/11/2007) [2007] IEHC 411

Wymes v Roche

The defendants brought two motions seeking orders striking out the plaintiff’s claims against the defendants on the grounds that the plaintiff did not have any standing or entitlement to maintain the proceedings. The plaintiff’s claim sought inter alia an order restraining the first named defendant from entering into contractual relations with his wife or on her behalf until such time as she ceased to be subject to coercion and undue influence.

Held by Sheehan J. in striking out the plaintiff’s claims that once the wife indicated to the Court that she did not wish the proceedings to be maintained, it was clear that her rights were being breached by the maintenance of the proceedings.

Reporter: R.W.

1

Mr. Justice Garrett Sheehan delivered on the 26th day of November, 2007

2

1. The first motion is brought by the first named defendant and the second motion is brought by the second and third named defendants.

3

2. All the defendants seek an order pursuant to para. C of the notice of motion filed on behalf of the first named defendant seeking an order dismissing or, alternatively, striking out the plaintiff's claims against the defendants on the grounds that the plaintiff does not have any standing or entitlement to maintain the proceedings herein.

4

3. In the plaintiff's general endorsement of claim he seeks inter alia an order restraining the first named defendant...

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