U P DAT E
The Bar Review, journal of The Bar of Ireland
A directory of legislation, articles and acquisitions received in the Law Library from November 10, 2016, to January 18, 2017
Judgment information supplied by Justis Publishing Ltd
Edited by Deirdre Lambe and Vanessa Curley, Law Library, Four Courts.
A D M I N I S T R AT I V E L AW
Librar y acquisitions
I n s t i t u te o f P u b l i c A d m i n i s t ra t i o n
I n s t i t u t e o f P u b l i c A d m i n i s t r a t i o n
Ireland – A Directory 2017 (51st ed )
D u b l i n : I n s t i t u te o f P u b l i c Administration, 2016 – Ref
AG R I C U LT U R E
Statutor y instruments
A s s e m b l y o f a n i m a l s fo r e x p o r t regulations 2016 – SI 212/2016
C a r r i a g e o f l i v e s to c k b y s e a
( a m e n d m e n t ) re g u l a t i o n s 2 0 1 6 – S I 455/2016
H o r s e ra c i n g I re l a n d a c t 2 0 1 6
( co m m e n ce m e n t o f ce r t a i n p ro v i s i o n s ) o rd e r 2 0 1 6 – S I 138/2016
A R B I T R AT I O N
Librar y acquisitions
v a n d e n B e rg , A J I n t e r n a t i o n a l
C o u n c i l f o r C o m m e r c i a l A r b i t r a t i o n
Y e a r b o o k c o m m e r c i a l a r b i t r a t i o n : volume XLI – 2016 The Netherlands: K l u w e r L a w I n te r n a t i o n a l , 2 0 1 7 –N398 3
Ar ticles
Wade, G The Cour t of Arbitration for S p o r t : J u d g i n g t h e O l y m p i c g a m e s
C o m m e r c i a l L a w P r a c t i t i o n e r 2 0 1 6 ; 23 (11): 287
A S Y L U M
Asylum, immigration and nationality – Re f u g e e s t a t u s – C l a i m fo r –
E d u c a t i o n – W h e t h e r f a i l u re to p ro v i d e e d u c a t i o n s u f f i c i e n t to establish grounds for claim for status – C o n s i d e re d B a r r y v M i n i s t e r fo r
A g r i c u l t u r e a n d F o o d [ 2 0 1 5 ] 7 J I C
1 6 0 1 ,
O’Donnell Donal J , Clarke J , Laffoy
J , C h a r l e to n J – 2 1 / 1 2 / 2 0 1 6 ) –[2016] IESC 77
E D ( E d u c a t i o n ) v R e f u g e e A p p e a l s
Tribunal
BA N K I
N G
B a n k i n g – C o n s e n t o rd e r – L i a b i l i t y
– Applied Byrne Motor s Ltd v Rover
Lt d [ 1 9 9 8 ] I E H C 2 3 2 , Re fe r re d to
Allied Irish Banks Plc v Darcy [2016]
7 J I C 1 4 0 1 , Re fe r re d to A l l i e d I r i s h
Banks Plc v Thomas Darcy and Anor
[ 2 0 1 5 ] I E H C 3 5 3 – ( L a f fo y J ,
M c Ke c h n i e J , M a c M e n a m i n J –
10/11/2016) – [2016] IESC 65
Allied Irish Banks plc v Darcy
B a n k i n g a n d f i n a n ce – I n s o l v e n c y –
P ra c t i ce a n d p ro ce d u re s – Re fe r re d
to A A v B A [ 2 0 1 5 ] 1 1 J I C 0 9 0 8 ,
Re fe r re d to G a y n o r v C
S
r v i ce [ 2 0 1 5 ] 1 1 J I C 3 0 0 6 , Re fe r re d to I n
Re Greendale Developments Ltd (No 3) [2000] 2 IR 514 – (Humphreys J – 16/12/2016) – [2016] IEHC 730
Gaynor (A Bankrupt) (No 2) v Courts Service of Ireland
Undue influence – Non est factum –
A rg u a b l e d e fe n
R
1 ) [2001] 4 IR 607, Applied Harrisrange
Ltd v Duncan [2003] 4 IR 1, Applied
Royal Bank of Scotland plc v Etridge (No 2) [2002] 2 AC 773 – (Pear t J , B i r m i n g h a m J , H o g a n J –07/12/2016) – [2016] IECA 371
Ulster Bank (Ireland) Ltd v De Kretser
Statutor y instruments
Central Bank Act 1942 (section 32D) regulations 2016 – SI 508/2016
C e n t ra l B a n k a c t 1 9 7 1 ( a p p ro v a l o f
s c h e m e o f t ra n s fe r b e t w e e n LG T
Bank (Ireland) Limited and LGT Bank Limited) order 2016 – SI 465/2016
C e n t ra l B a n k A c t 1 9 9 7 ( a u d i to r assurance) (amendment) regulations 2016 – SI 445/2016
C e n t ra l B a n k ( s u p e r v i s i o n a n d e n fo rce m e n t ) a c t 2 0 1 3 ( s e c t i o n 4 8 ( 1 ) ) i n v e s to r m o n e y re g u l a t i o n s fo r f u n d s e r v i ce p ro v i d e r s ( a m e n d m e n t ) re g u l a t i o n s 2 0 1 6 – S I 87/2016
C e n t ra l B a n k ( S u p e r v i s i o n a n d
E n fo rce m e n t ) A c t 2 0 1 3 ( s e c t i o n
4 8 ( 1 ) ) ( i n s u ra n ce u n d e r t a k i n g s national specific templates repor ting arrangements) regulations 2016 – SI 159/2016
C e n t ra l B a n k ( S u p e r v i s i o n a n d Enforcement) Act 2013 (section 48) (lending to small and medium-sized e n te r p r i s e s ) ( a m e n d m e n t ) regulations 2016 – SI 280/2016
C e n t ra l B a n k ( S u p e r v i s i o n a n d
E n fo rce m e n t ) A c t 2 0 1 3 ( s e c t i o n
4 8 ( 1 ) ) ( u n d e r t a k i n g s fo r co l l e c t i v e investment in transferable securities)
( a m e n d m e n t ) re g u l a t i o n s 2 0 1 6 – S I 307/2016
C e n t ra l B a n k ( S u p e r v i s i o n a n d Enforcement) Act 2013 (section 48)
( h o u s i n g l o a n re q u i re m e n t s )
( a m e n d m e n t ) re g u l a t i o n s 2 0 1 6 – S I 568/2016
C o n s u m e r C re d i t A c t 1 9 9 5 ( s e c t i o n 2) regulations 2016 – SI 325/2016
C re d i t i n s t i t u t i o n s re s o l u t i o n f u n d l e v y ( a m e n d m e n t ) re g u l a t i o n s 2 0 1 6 – SI 499/2016
C re d i t Re p o r t i n g A c t 2 0 1 3 ( s e c t i o n
6 ) ( a d d i t i o n a l p e r s o n a l i n fo r m a t i o n ) regulations 2016 – SI 485/2016
C re d i t Re p o r t i n g A c t 2 0 1 3 ( s e c t i o n 1 1 ) ( p ro v i s i o n o f i n fo r m a t i o n fo r ce n t ra l c re d i t re g i s te r ) re g u l a t i o n s 2016 – SI 486/2016
C re d i t Re p o r t i n g A c t 2 0 1 3 ( s e c t i o n 17) (access to central credit register) regulations 2016 – SI 487/2016
C re d i t Re p o r t i n g A c t 2 0 1 3 ( s e c t i o n 20) (verification of identity of credit i n fo r m a t i o n s u b j e c t s ) re g u l a t i o n s
2016 – SI 488/2016
C
489/2016
C re d i
regulations 2016 – SI 585/2016
Credit union fund (stabilisation) lev y regulations 2016 – SI 583/2016
E u ro p e
481/2016
European Union (bank recover y and re s o l u t i o n ) re s o l u t i o n f u n d l
y regulations 2016 – SI 202/2016
European Union (payment accounts) regulations 2016 – SI 482/2016
B I L L S O F E X C H A N G E
Librar y acquisitions
G u e s t , A G C h a l m e r s a n d G
s t o n bills of exchange and cheques (18th e d ) Lo n d o n : S w e e t & M a x w e l l , 2016 – N306 2
B U I L D I N G
C O N T R AC T S
Librar y acquisitions
Hussey, A Construction adjudication i n I r e l a n d A b i n g d o n : Ro u t l e d g e , 2017 – N83 C5
C H A R I T Y
Statutor y instruments
Charities act 2009 (commencement) (no 2) order 2016 – SI 424/2016 Charities Act 2009 (commencement) order 2016 – SI 350/2016
C H I L D R E N
Statutor y instruments
C
221/2016
C h i l d re n f i r s t a c t 2 0 1 5 ( co m m e n ce m e n t ) o rd e r 2 0 1 6 – S I 211/2016
C O M M E R C I A L L AW
Librar y acquisitions
C h r i s to u , R D r a f t i n g c o m m e r c i a l agreements (6th ed ) London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2016 – N250
R u d d y, N , M i l l s , S , D a v i d s o n , N
S a l i n g e r o n f a c t o r i n g ( 5 t h e d )
Lo n d o n : S w e e t & M a x w e l l , 2 0 1 7 –N305 8
Ar ticles
Khan, S International comparison of
co r p o ra te g o v e r n a n ce e x e c u t i v e
re m u n e ra t i o n [ p a r t 1 ] I r i s h L a w Times 2016; (34) (18): 262; [par t 2] Irish Law Times 2016; (34) (19): 270;
[ p a r t 3 ] I r i s h L a w T i m e s 2 0 1 6 ; ( 3 4 ) (20): 292
C O M PA N Y L AW
C o m p a n y – S 5 2 o f t h e C o m p a n i e s Act, 2014 – O29 of the Rules of the
S u p e r i o r C o u r t s – A p p l i e d C M C
M e d i ca l O p e r a t i o n s Lt d ( i n liquidation) t/a Cork Medical Centre
v Vo l u n t a r y H e a l t h I n s u ra n ce B o a rd [2015] IECA 68, Applied Ochre Ridge v Cork Bonded [2000] 12 JIC 2001 –( E a g a r J – 1 7 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 6 ) – [ 2 0 1 6 ] IEHC 660
O r c a F i n a n c i a l L t d v B a l l y c r a g Developments Ltd
Librar y acquisitions
H o l l i n g to n , R H o l l i n g t o n o n
s h a r e h o l d e r s ’ r i g h t s ( 8 t h e d )
Lo n d o n : S w e e t & M a x w e l l , 2 0 1 7 –N263
Hutchinson, B , Keane, R Keane on C o m p a n y l a w ( 5 t h e d ) D u b l i n : B l o o m s b u r y P ro fe s s i o n a l , 2 0 1 6 –N261 C5
Ar ticles
D o n n e l l y, D E x p e n s e s , c h a rg e s a n d n e ce s s a r y d i s b u r s e m e n t s o f a l i q u i d a to r fo l l o w i n g t h e C o m p a n i e s
Act 2014: (par t II) Irish Business Law Review 2016; (3) (1): 37 Heslin, M Shareholder oppression –
r i g h t s , i n te re s t s , e x p e c t a t i o n s a n d equity Commercial Law Practitioner 2016; 23 (11): 271
S h a n a h a n , E I s e x a m i n e r s h i p fo r
s m a l l e r co m p a n i e s w o r t h h a v i n g ?
Irish Business Law Review 2016; (3) (1): 51
Statutor y instruments
C o m p a n i e s a c t 2 0 1 4
( co m m e n ce m e n t ) o rd e r 2 0 1 6 – S I 562/2016
C o m p a n i e s a c t 2 0 1 4 ( s e c t i o n 8 3 9 ) regulations 2016 – SI 147/2016
C o m p a n i e s a c t 2 0 1 4 ( s e c t i o n 8 9 7 ) order 2016 – SI 458/2016
B u s i n e s s n a m e s re g u l a t i o n s 2 0 1 6 –
SI 339/2016
C re d i t g u a ra n te e ( a m e n d m e n t ) a c t
2016 (commencement) order 2016 –
SI 504/2016
C
O M P
E T I T I O N L AW
Librar y acquisitions
G ra e f, I E U c o m p e t i t i o n l a w , d a t a
protection and online platforms: data as essential facility The Netherlands: Wolters Kluwer, 2016 – W110
v a n d e r Wo u d e , M , J o n e s , C E U
c o m p e t i t i
n l a w h a n d b
2 0 1 7 ( 2 0 1 7 e d ) Lo n d o n : S w e e t & Maxwell, 2016 – W110
C O N T R AC T
Contract – Practice and procedures –
O8, r 2 of the Rules of the Superior
C o u r t s – A p p l i e d M o n a h a n v B y r n e [ 2
O’Keef fe v G & T Crampton Ltd and
A n o r ( 2 0 0 9 ) 1 6 ( 9 ) C L P 2 0 8 –
( M c D e r m o t t J – 0 9 / 1 2 / 2 0 1 6 ) –[2016] IEHC 704
Pugh v PGM Financial Services Ltd
Librar y acquisitions
C a r t w r i g h t , J M i s r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , m i s t a k e a n d n o n - d i s c l o s u r e ( 4 t h e d ) Lo n d o n : S w e e t & M a x w e l l , 2017 – N15 4 A n d e r s o n , M , Wa r n e r, V D r a f t i n g
a n d n e g o t i a t i n g c o m m e r c i a l
contracts (4th ed ) Hay wards Heath: Bloomsbur y Publishing, 2016 – N10
C O P Y R I G H T
Ar ticles
M a z z i o t t i , G W i l l E u ro p e m a ke
co p y r i g h t b o rd e r l e s s a n d internet-friendly? Irish Business Law
Review 2016; (3) (1): 1
C O S T S
C o s t s – A s s a u l t – N e g l i g e n ce –
A p p l i e d C o u g h l a n v D i s t r i c t J u s t i ce
Pa t w e l l [ 1 9 9 3 ] 1 I R 3 1 , A p p l i e d
McDonnell v Ireland [1998] 1 IR 134
– ( I r v i n e J , H o g a n J , H e d i g a n J –07/12/2016) – [2016] IECA 372
S a v i c k i s v G o v e r n o r o f C a s t l e r e a
Prison
C o s t s – L i a b i l i t y – L i q u i d a t i o n –
Respondent seeking costs – Whether
a p p e l l a n t w a s p a r t y to t h e p ro ce e d i n g s – Re fe r re d to G re e n c
e a n Wa s t e M a n
g e m e n t Lt d v Le a h y ( t / a M a u r i ce Le a h y & C o
Solicitors) [2013] IEHC 74, Referred to S i m p s o n v N o r fo l k a n d N o r w i c h
Univer sit y Hospital NHS Trust [2012] Q B 6 4 0 , Re fe r re d to S te l l a C o
– (Mahon J , Birmingham J , Edwards J – 14/11/2016) – [2016] IECA 332 DPP v Gleeson
n n e J –15/12/2016) – [2016] IESC 72
Costello Transport Ltd v Singh
Costs – Personal injur y – Misconduct – A p p e l l a n t s e e k i n g to a p p e a l
a g a i n s t a n o rd e r d i re c t i n g t h e
p a y m e n t o u t to t h e n o t i ce p a r t y o f the balance of par ty and par ty costs – W h e t h e r o rd e r w a s a l m o s t exclusively based on alleging various acts of misconduct or impropriety, or
o f d i s h o n e s t y – A p p l i e d B a n k o f
I r e l a n d v B r e e n [ 1 9 8 7 ] WJ S C -S C
2 5 4 5 , A p p l i e d B r e w e r v
C o m m i s s i o n e r s o f P u b l i c Wo r k s
[ 2 0 0 3 ] 3 I R 5 3 9 , A p p l i e d E i r e
C o n t i n e n t a l Tr a d i n g C o Lt d v
C l o n m e l Fo o d s Lt d [ 1 9 5 5 ] I R 1 7 0 –
( M c Ke c h n i e J , M a c M e n a m i n J ,
D u n n e J – 1 6 / 1 2 / 2 0 1 6 ) – [ 2 0 1 6 ]
IESC 75
Cadden v Vesey
C O U RT S
Acts
Cour ts Act 2016 – Act No 22 of 2016 – signed on December 28, 2016
Statutor y instruments
C o u r t s a c t 1 9 8 1 ( i n te re s t o n
j u d g m e n t d e b t s ) o rd e r 2 0 1 6 – S I
624/2016
D i s t r i c t C o u r t ( c r i m i n a l j u s t i ce
( fo re n s i c e v i d e n ce a n d D N A
d a t a b a s e s y s te m ) a c t 2 0 1 4 ) r u l e s
2016 – SI 567/2016
D i s t r i c t C o u r t ( i s s u e o f c i v i l p ro ce e d i n g s ) r u l e s 2 0 1 6 – S I 513/2016
District Cour t (solicitors’ costs) rules 2016 – SI 123/2016
F i n e s ( p a y m e n t a n d re co v e r y ) a c t 2 0 1 4 ( fe e s ) o rd e r 2 0 1 6 – S I 549/2016
C R I M I NA L L AW
C o n v i c t i o n – I n d e ce n t a s s a u l t –
Corroboration warning – Referred to DPP v CC [Cour t of Criminal Appeal] [2012] 12 JIC 0601, Referred to DPP v G e n t l e m a n [ 2 0 0 3 ] 4 I R 2 2 ,
Re fe r re d to D P P v R B ( U n re p o r te d , Fe b r u a r y 1 2 , 2 0 0 3 ) – ( B i r m i n g h a m
J , S h e e h a n J , M a h o n J –25/10/2016) – [2016] IECA 307 DPP v F McL
C o n v i c t i o n – Po s s e s s i o n o f d r u g s –
Duress – Considered Braddish v DPP [ 2 0 0 1 ] 3 I R 1 2 7 , C o n s i d e re d D P P v D i c ke y [ 2 0 0 3 ] 3 J I C 0 7 0 6 , Considered R v Lawrence 32 ALR 72
Conviction – Rape – Mental element – Applied DPP v C [2001] 3 IR 345, Applied DPP v Fergal Cagney [2008] 2
IESC 64 DPP v O’R
McLaughlin v Aviva Insurance [2011] IESC 42 – (Keane J – 28/10/2016) – [2016] IEHC 591 M c G u i n n e s s v C
Garda Síochána
C r i m e a n d s e n te n c i n g – D r u g s –Appeal against sentence – Supply of d r u g s o v e r D a r k N e t – S e v e r i t y o f sentence – (Birmingham J , Sheehan J , E d w a rd s J – 0 3 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 6 ) –[2016] IECA 314 DPP v Mannion
Crime and sentencing – Extradition –E u ro p e a n a r re s t w a r ra n t – A p p l i e d L a n i g a n v G o v e r n o r o f C l o v e r h i l l Prison [2016] 10 JIC 1904, Referred to Po w e r, F l y n n a Lt d v M i n i s t e r fo r Fisheries and Forestr y [1985] IR 193, Re fe r re d to I n re D ( A p p l i c a t i o n o f Midland Health Board) [1987] IR 449 – ( F i n l a y G e o g h e g a n J , H o g a n J , H a n n a J – 1 4 / 1 2 / 2 0 1 6 ) – [ 2 0 1 6 ] IECA 388 O w c z a r z v G o v e r n o r o f C l o v e r h i l l Prison
C r i m e a n d s e n te n c i n g – S e x u a l o f fe n ce s – A t te m p te d ra p e s a n d s e x u a l a s s a u l t s – ( B i r m i n g h a m J , S h e e h a n J , M a h o n J –09/12/2016) – [2016] IECA 390 DPP v JF C r i m
[1998] IESC 39,
to
Vye [
09/12/2016) – [2016] IECA 391 DPP v PC
C r i m e a n d s e n te n c i n g – S e x u a l o f fe n ce s – O f fe n ce s co m m i t
(Birmingham J , Sheehan J , Edwards J – 13/12/2016) – [2016] IECA 386 DPP v Kiely
C r i m e a n d s e n te n c i n g – S e x u a l
o f fe n ce s – S e n te n c i n g fo r m u l t i p l e sexual assaults – Applied Mulholland v Mitchell [1971] AC 666, Considered DPP v Cunningham [2002] 2 IR 712, D P P v D u f f y [ 2 0 0 3 ] 2 I R 1 9 2 –
( D e n h a m C J , O ’ D o n n e l l D o n a l J , Clarke J , Charleton J , O’Malley J –28/11/2016) – [2016] IESC 69 DPP v Colbert
Sentencing – Drug offences – Undue
l e n i e n c y – A p p l i e d D P P v
M c C o r m a c k [ 2 0 0 0 ] 4 I R 3 5 6 –(Mahon J , Birmingham J , Sheehan
J – 24/11/2016) – [2016] IECA 356 DPP v Clohessy
S e n te n c i n g – M o n e y l a u n d e r i n g –
S e v e r i t y o f s e n te n ce – Re fe r re d to DPP v McCormack [2000] 4 IR 356, Referred to DPP v McHugh [2002] 1
I R 3 5 2 , Re fe r re d to D P P v T i m o t h y
C u n n i n g h a m [ 2 0 1 3 ] I E CC A 6 2 –(Mahon J , Birmingham J , Sheehan J – 27/10/2016) – [2016] IECA 309 DPP v Trimble
S e n te n c i n g – Ro b b e r y – S e v e r i t y o f
s e n te n ce – A p p e l l a n t s e e k i n g to
a p p e a l a g a i n s t s e n te n ce – W h e t h e r
s e n te n ce w a s u n d u l y s e v e re –
Applied DPP v McCormack [2000] 4 IR 356 – (Birmingham J , Mahon J , Edwards J – 08/12/2016) – [2016] IECA 379
DPP v Obaseki
S e n te n c i n g – S e x u a l o f fe n ce s –
S e v e r i t y o f s e n te n ce – A p p e l l a n t seeking to appeal against sentence –Whether sentence was unduly severe
– ( B i r m i n g h a m J , S h e e h a n J , M a h o n J – 2 7 / 1 0 / 2 0 1 6 ) – [ 2 0 1 6 ] IECA 312
DPP v ET
Librar y acquisitions
A r l i d g e , A , M i l n e , A , S p re n g e r, P Arlidge and Parry on fraud (5th ed )
Lo n d o n : S w e e t & M a x w e l l , 2 0 1 6 –
M547
T h o m s o n Ro u n d H a l l O f f e n c e s h a n d b o o k 2 0 1 6 : c r i m i n a l & r o a d
traffic Dublin: Thomson Round Hall, 2016 – M500 C5 Z14
Ar ticles
L a m b o u r n e , T , Wo o d , S W i l l t h e
co u n te r- te r ro r i s m a n d s e c u r i t y a c t
2 0 1 5 b e t h e f i n a l p i e ce o f counter-terrorism legislation to stem
t h e t i d e o f e x t re m i s m I r i s h L a w
Times 2016; (34) (20): 286
Statutor y instruments
Criminal Justice (Money Laundering a n d Te r ro r i s t F i n a n c i n g ) A c t 2 0 1 0
( co m p e te n t a u t h o r i t y a n d s t a te
co m p e te n t a u t h o r i t y ) re g u l a t i o n s 2016 – SI 453/2016
C r i m i n a l J u s t i ce ( Te r ro r i s t O f fe n ce s )
A c t 2 0 0 5 ( s e c t i o n 4 2 ) ( re s t r i c t i v e
measures concerning cer tain persons and entities associated with the ISIL (Da’esh) and Al-Qaida organisations)
( n o 2 ) re g u l a t i o n s 2 0 1 6 – S I
463/2016
C r i m i n a l J u s t i ce ( Te r ro r i s t O f fe n ce s )
A
measures concerning cer tain persons and entities associated with the ISIL (Da’esh) and Al-Qaida organisations)
( n o 3 ) re g u l a t i o n s 2 0 1 6 – S I
472/2016
C r i m i n a l J u s t i ce ( Te r ro r i s t O f fe n ce s )
A c t 2 0 0 5 ( s e c t i o n 4 2 ) ( re s t r i c t i v e
measures concerning cer tain persons and entities associated with the ISIL (Da’esh) and Al-Qaida organisations)
( n o 6 ) re g u l a t i o n s 2 0 1 6 – S I
563/2016
DA M AG E S
D a m a g e s – N e g l i g e n t m i s s t a te m e n t – M i s re p re s e n t a t i o n – A p p l i e d
Cramaso LLP v Ogilvie-Grant [2014]
S C ( S C ) 1 2 1 – ( R y a n P , Pe a r t J , H o g a n J – 2 3 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 6 ) – [ 2 0 1 6 ] IECA 346
S p e n c e r v I r i s h B a n k R e s o l u t i o n
Corporation Ltd
Librar y acquisitions
L a w s o n , R D a m a g e s f o r b r e a c h o f contract London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2016 – N37 1
Q u i l l , E , F r i e l , R J D a m a g e s a n d c o m p e n s a t i o n c u l t u r e : c o m p a r a t i v e p e r s p e c t i v e s O x fo rd : H a r t Publishing, 2016 – N37 1 008
DATA P R OT E C T I O N
Statutor y instruments
D a t a p ro te c t i o n a c t 1 9 8 8 ( s e c t i o n 2A) regulations 2016 – SI 220/2016
D I S C OV E RY
Librar y acquisitions
T h e B a r o f I re l a n d C P D, D r i n a n , S ,
B e i r n e , A , M a r t i n , E , M c L a u g h l i n , J , Har ty, K Discovery and the Junior B a r C o n f e r e n c e : J a n u a r y 2 9 , 2 0 1 6
The Bar of Ireland CPD: Dublin, 2016 – L130 46 C5
Matthews, P , Malek, H M Disclosure (5th ed ) London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2017 – N386
E A S E M E N T S
Librar y acquisitions
G a u n t , J , M o rg a n , T h e H o n M r
J u s t i ce G a l e o n e a s e m e n t s ( 2 0 t h
e d ) Lo n d o n : S w e e t & M a x w e l l , 2017 – N65 1
E
D U CAT I O N
Statutor y instruments
S t u d e n t g ra n t s c h e m e 2 0 1 6 – S I 153/2016
S t u d e n t s u p p o r t a c t 2 0 1 1
( p re s c r i b e d p e r s o n s ) re g u l a t i o n s 2016 – SI 139/2016
Student suppor t regulations 2016 –SI 154/2016
Te a c h i n g co u n c i l a c t 2 0 0 1
( co m m e n ce m e n t ) o rd e r 2 0 1 6 – S I 407/2016
Te a c h i n g co u n c i l ( a m e n d m e n t ) a c t
2015 (commencement) (no 2) order 2016 – SI 222/2016
Te a c h i n g C o u n c i l ( a m e n d m e n t ) a c t
2015 (commencement) (no 3) order
2016 – SI 408/2016
Te a c h i n g C o u n c i l ( a m e n d m e n t ) a c t
2015 (commencement) (no 4) order
2016 – SI 556/2016
Te a c h i n g C o u n c i l ( d i s c i p l i n a r y
co m m i t te e p a n e l p ro ce d u re s ) r u l e s
2016 – SI 411/2016
Te a c h i n g C o u n c i l ( e v i d e n ce , re p re s e n t a t i o n s a n d e x a m i n a t i o n i n
c a s e o f a l l e g e d m e d i c a l u n f i t n e s s ) regulations 2016 – SI 410/2016
Te a c h i n g C o u n c i l ( re g i s t ra t i o n )
( a m e n d m e n t ) re g u l a t i o n s 2 0 1 6 – S I 557/2016
Te a c h i n g C o u n c i l ( re g i s t ra t i o n )
regulations 2016 – SI 444/2016
E M P L OY M E N T L AW
E m p l o y m e n t – P ro te c t i o n o f
E m p l o y m e n t A c t , 1 9 7 7 –
I n v e s t i g a t i o n o f co l l e c t i v e
re d u n d a n c i e s – A p p l i e d H e a n e y v
Commissioner of An Garda Síochána
[ 2 0 0 7 ] 2 I R 6 9 – ( Tw o m e y J –25/10/2016) – [2016] IEHC 585
F o l e y v W o r k p l a c e R e l a t i o n s
Commission
Librar y acquisitions
D o n o v a n , D E m p l o y m e n t l a w ( 2 n d e d ) D u b l i n : Ro u n d H a l l , 2 0 1 6 –
N192 C5
Ke r r, A E m p l o y m e n t e q u a l i t y
l e g i s l a t i o n ( 5 t h e d ) D u b l i n :
T h o m s o n Ro u n d H a l l , 2 0 1 6 –
N191 2 C5
Ke r r, A T e r m i n a t i o n o f e m p l o y m e n t
s t a t u t e s ( 5 t h e d ) D u b l i n : Ro u n d
Hall, 2016 – N192 2 C5 Z14
Ar ticles
M a g u i re , C T h e e n fo rce a b i l i t y o f
co l l e c t i v e a g re e m e n t s I r i s h
Employment Law Journal 2016; (13) (4): 92
O ’ C a l l a g h a n , E H i s to r i c a l m a t te r s a n d a m e n d m e n t s – a s t a t u to r y e m p l o y m e n t l a w q u e s t i
Employment Law Journal 2016; (13) (4): 100
Wa rd , P M a k
n
w o r k p l a ce investigations work The Bar Review 2016: (21) (6): 180
Statutor y instruments
E m p l o y
(relevant date) regulations 2016 – SI 126/2016 E
363/2016
2016 – SI 403/2016
European Union (posting of workers) regulations 2016 – SI 412/2016 National minimum wage order 2016 – SI 516/2016 Wo r k p l
5 (section 37) (commencement) order 2016 – SI 206/2016
E N E R G Y
Statutor y instruments Energy act 2016 (commencement of cer tain provisions) (no 2) order 2016 – SI 572/2016
E
N V I R O N M E N TA L
L AW
Librar y acquisitions
Wa i te , A , J o n e s , G , Fo g l e m a n , V Waite and Jewell: Environmental law i
Professional, 2016 – N94
Ar ticles
v a n D o
d farm “setback” guidelines Irish Law Times 2016; (34) (19): 270
Statutor y instruments
Air Pollution Act 1987 (registration of fuel bagging operators and suppliers, a
571/2016
Air Pollution Act (fixed payment notice) (paints) regulations 2016 – SI 348/2016
Air Pollution Act (fixed payment notice) (solvents) regulations 2016 – SI 347/2016
A i r Po l l u t i o n A c t ( m a r ke t i n g , s a l e , distribution and burning of specified fuels) (amendment) regulations 2016 – SI 128/2016
B a t h i n g w a te r q u a l i t y ( a m e n d m e n t ) regulations 2016 – SI 163/2016
D e re l i c t s i te s ( u r b a n a re a s ) ( n o 2 ) regulations 2016 – SI 564/2016
D e re l i c t s i te s ( u r b a n a re a s ) regulations 2016 – SI 135/2016
E n v i ro n m e n t ( m i s ce l l a n e o u s
p ro v i s i o n s ) a c t 2 0 1 5 ( p a r t 9 )
( co m m e n ce m e n t ) o rd e r 2 0 1 6 – S I 505/2016
E Q U I T Y A N D T R U S T S
Librar y acquisitions
G ro v e s , M , We e k s , G L e g i t i m a t e
e x p e c t a t i o n s i n t h e c o m m o n l a w
world Oxford: Har t Publishing, 2016 – N200
E U R O P E A N U N I O N
Librar y acquisitions
Hancher, L , Ottervanger, T , Slot, P J
E U s t a t e a i d s ( 5 t h e d ) Lo n d o n : Sweet & Maxwell, 2016 – W110 1
Ar ticles
Ahern, D The EU, close corporations
a n d m e m b e r s t a te s o v e re i g n t y : to o close for comfor t? Critical reflections
o n t h e e v o l v i n g s o c i e t a s u n i u s p e r s o n a e ( S U P ) p ro p o s a l I r i s h
B u s i n e s s L a w R e v i e w 2 0 1 6 ; ( 3 ) ( 1 ) : 21
Bredin, C , Curneen, K Breaking bad Law Society Gazette 2016; (Dec): 34
Statutor y instruments
E u ro p e a n C o m m u n i t i e s ( d i re c t s u p p o r t s c h e m e s ) o f fe n ce s a n d co n t ro l s re g u l a t i o n s 2 0 1 6 – S I 169/2016
E u ro p e a n C o m m u n i t i e s ( i n t ra - co m m u n i t y t ra n s fe r s o f d e fe n ce - re l a te d p ro d u c t s )
( a m e n d m e n t ) re g u l a t i o n s 2 0 1 6 – S I 473/2016
E u ro p e a n C o m m u n i t i e s ( l a te payment in commercial transactions) ( a m e n d m e n t ) re g u l a t i o n s 2 0 1 6 – S I 281/2016
E u ro p e a n U n i o n ( a n t i - m o n e y l a u n d e r i n g : b e n e f i c i a l o w n e r s h i p o f corporate entities) regulations 2016 – SI 560/2016
E V I D E N C E
E v i d e n ce – Re - t r i a l – B u rg l a r y –Appellant seeking re-trial – Whether
t r i a l j u d g e e r ro n e o u s l y e x c l u d e d compelling evidence – Distinguished D P P v D o n n e l l y [ C o u r t o f C r i m i n a l Appeal] [2012] 7 JIC 3002, Applied
R v A r g e n t ( 1 9 9 7 ) 1 6 1 J P 1 2 7 ,
Referred to DPP v JC [2015] IESC 31
– (Denham C J , O’Donnell Donal J , O’Malley J – 14/12/2016) – [2016]
IESC 71 DPP v McD
E X T R A D I T I O N L AW
A d j o u r n m e n t – E u ro p e a n a r re s t
warrant – Notice of appeal – Applied
B a l m e r v M i n i s t e r fo r J u s t i ce a n d
E q u a l i t y [ 2 0 1 6 ] 5 J I C 1 2 0 1 –
( D e n h a m C J , O ’ D o n n e l l J , M c Ke c h n i e J , C l a r ke J , D u n n e J , C h a r l e to n J , O ’ M a
J –27/10/2016) – [2016] IESC 63
Minister for Justice Equality and Law Reform v Wharrie
E u ro p ean a r res t wa r ra n t – Po in t s o f law – Delay – Referred to Minister for
J
Equalit y v Ostrowski [2013] 4 IR 206, Re fe r re d to M i n i s t e r fo r J u s t i ce a n d
E q u a l i t y v J A T N o 2 [ 2 0 1 6 ] 4 J I C 2801 – (Birmingham J , Sheehan J , M a h o n J – 2 5 / 1 0 / 2 0 1 6 ) – [ 2 0 1 6 ] IECA 303
Minister for Justice and Equality v PK
FA M I LY L AW
Librar y acquisitions
H o r to n , M C o m p r o m i s e i n f a m i l y law: law and practice Bristol: Jordan Publishing, 2016 – N170 Z8
Lo w e , N , E v e ra l l , M , N i c h o l l s , M I n t e r n a t i o n a l m o v e m e n t o f c h i l d r e n : l a w , p r a c t i c e a n d p r o c e d u r e ( 2 n d e d ) B r i s to l : Le x i s N e x i s , 2 0 1 6 –N173 8
Ar ticles
C r y a n , A C h a n g i n g d e m o g ra p h i c s : legal responses to polygamy and the c h a l l e n g e s a h e a d fo r I re l a n d I r i s h
J o u r n a l o f F a m i l y L a w 2 0 1 6 ; ( 1 9 ) (4): 82
O’Mahony, C , Parkes, A , Shore, C , Burns, K Child care proceedings and f a m i l y - f r i e n d l y j u s t i ce : t h e p ro b l e m w i t h co u r t f a c i l i t i e s Irish Journal of Family Law 2016; (19) (4): 75
F I NA N C E
Acts
F i n a n ce A c t 2 0 1 6 – A c t N o 1 8 o f 2 0 1 6 – s i g n e d o n D e ce m b e r 2 5 , 2016
F I S H E R I E S
Fisheries – Mussels – Entitlement to f i s h – A p p l i e d M o o r e a n d O r s v A t t o r n e y - G e n e r a l a n d O r s ( N o 3 )
[ 1 9 3 0 ] I R 4 7 1 , C o n s i d e re d N e i l l v
Devonshire (Duke of ) 8 AppCas 135 – ( D e n h a m C J , O ’ D o n n e l l J ,
M c Ke c h n i e J , C l a r ke J , L a f fo y J –
27/10/2016) – [2016] IESC 62
B a r l o w v M i n i s t e r f o r A g r i c u l t u r e ,
Food and the Marine
F R E E D O M O F
I N F O R M AT I O N
Librar y acquisitions
L a m b e r t , P D a t a p r o t e c t i o n l a w i n
Ireland: sources and issues (2nd ed )
D u b l i n : C l a r u s P re s s , 2 0 1 6 –
M209 D5 C5
G OV E R N M E N T
Acts
Appropriation Act 2016 – Act No 16
o f 2 0 1 6 – s i g n e d o n D e ce m b e r 2 0 , 2016
H U M A N R I G H T S
H u m a n R i g h t s – S 1 0 ( 2 ) ( e ) o f t h e
Irish Human Rights and Equality Act, 2 0 1 4 – I r i s h H u m a n R i g h t s a n d
E q u a l i t y C o m m i s s i o n – A p p l i e d
M e a d o w s v M i n i s t e r fo r J u s t i ce ,
Equalit y and Law Reform [2010] 2 IR
7 0 1 – ( E a g a r J – 0 9 / 1 2 / 2 0 1 6 ) –[2016] IEHC 705
LC v Director of Oberstown
Librar y acquisitions
Burson, B , Cantor, D J Human rights
a n d t h e r e f u g e e d e f i n i t i o n :
c o m p a r a t i v e l e g a l p r a c t i c e a n d
t h e o r y T h e N e t h e r l a n d s : Brill/Nijhoff, 2016 – C200
Ar ticles
M c M a h o n , A D o s S a n to s a n d C I : i m p l i c a t i o n s fo r t h e r i g h t to re s p e c t for private life Irish Law Times 2016; (34) (18): 257
I M M I G R AT I O N
I m m i g ra t i o n – O rd e r o f ce r t i o r a r i –
Judicial review – Distinguished I (C)
a n d O r s v M i n i s t e r fo r J u s t i ce a n d
Or s [ 2 0 1 5 ] I E C A 1 9 2 , D i s t i n g u i s h e d
PO v Minister for Justice [2015] 7 JIC
1 6 0 2 , Re fe r re d to D o s S a n t o s a n d
O r s v M i n i s t e r fo r J u s t i ce a n d O r s
[ 2 0 1 5 ] I E C A 2 1 0 – ( F i n l a y
G e o g h e g a n J , Pe a r t J , H o g a n J –15/12/2016) – [2016] IECA 383
B a l c h a n d v M i n i s t e r f o r J u s t i c e a n d
Equality
I m m i g ra t i o n – O rd e r o f ce r t i o r a r i –
Points of law – Applied East Donegal
L u x i m o n v M i n i s t e r f o r J u s t i c e a n d Equality
Librar y acquisitions
C
Textbook on immigration and asylum l a w ( 7 t h e d ) O x fo rd : O x fo rd University Press, 2016 – C199
Routledge, 2015 – C206 E95 F r i
statelessness in the international law o
Publishing Ltd, 2016 – C205 L a w
status: the role of witness, expertise and testimony New York: Cambridge University Press, 2015 – C206 Reneman, M EU asylum procedures and the right to an effective remedy O x fo rd : H a r t P u b l i s h i n g , 2 0 1 6 –C206 E95
Statutor y Instruments
I m m i g ra t i o n a c t 1 9 9
134/2016
I m m i g ra t i o n a c t 2 0 0 4 ( v i s a s ) ( a m e n d m e n t ) o rd e r 2 0 1 6 – S I 502/2016
I n te r n a t i o n a l p ro te c t i o n a c t 2 0 1 5 (commencement) (no 2) order 2016 – SI 133/2016
I N F O R M AT I O N
T E C H N O L O G Y
Librar y acquisitions
T h e B a r o f I re l a n d C P D, J o h n s to n e , P , Harris, M , Kelleher, D , Curran, K U s e o f t e c h n o l o g y i n e t h i c s a n d practice : M a rc h 1 , 2 0 1 6 T h e B a r o f
I re l a n d C P D : D u b l i n , 2 0 1 6 –L130 46 C5
Ar ticles
Ke a v e y, S Re a d a l l a b o u t i t L a w Society Gazette 2016; (Dec): 44
K h a n , S A n i n t ro d u c t i o n to o p e n - s o u rce s o f t w a re fo r l a w y e r s C o m m e r c i a l L a w P r a c t i t i o n e r 2 0 1 6 ; 23 (10): 259
I N S U R A N C E
I n s u ra n ce – Re s j u d i ca t a – S p e c i a l c i rc u m s t a n ce s – Re s p o n d e n t s s e e k i n g a n o n - s u i t a n d t h e s t r i k i n g o u t o f t h e a p p e l l a n t ’s a c t i o n –Whether appellant’s claim was barred
C o - O p e r a t i v e L i v e s t o c k M a r t Lt d v A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l [ 1 9 7 0 ] I R 3 1 7 , Applied The State (Lynch) v Cooney [ 1 9 8 2 ] I R 3 3 7 – ( F i n l a y G e o g h e g a n J , Pear t J , Hogan J – 15/12/2016) – [2016] IECA 382
b y re a s o n o f r e s j u d i ca t a – A p p l i e d
G a l l a g h e r v ACC B a n k P LC ( N o 1 ) [2012] IESC 35, Considered Murphy v Canada Life Assurance Ireland Ltd
[ 2 0 1 6 ] 5 J I C 0 4 0 1 , C o n s i d e re d Murray v Trustees and Admin of the
I r i s h A i r l i n e s [ G e n E m p l o y e e ] Superannuation Scheme [2007] IEHC
2 7 – ( R y a n P , Pe a r t J , I r v i n e J –15/12/2016) – [2016] IECA 381 Crowley v Zurich Assurance plc
Librar y acquisitions
B u c k l e y, A J , B u c k l e y, D I n s u r a n c e
l a w ( 4 t h e d ) D u b l i n : Ro u n d H a l l , 2016 – N290 C5
G u r s e s , O T h e i n s u r a n c e o f
c o m m e r c i a l r i s k s : l a w a n d p r a c t i c e (5th ed ) London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2017 – N294
Re e d , P C o n s t r u c t i o n a l l r i s k s insurance (2nd ed ) London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2016 – N295 C3
Acts
H e a l t h I n s u ra n ce ( A m e n d m e n t ) A c t 2016 – Act No 19 of 2016 – signed on December 26, 2016
Statutor y instruments
H e a l t h I n s u ra n ce A c t 1 9 9 4 ( s e c t i o n 11E(2)) (no 2) regulations 2016 – SI 573/2016
H e a l t h ( re i m b u r s e m e n t l i s t ) (application fees) regulations 2016 –SI 576/2016
I N T E L L E C T U A L P R O P E RT Y
Librar y acquisitions
C l a r k , R S m y t h , S , H a l l , N
I n t e l l e c t u a l p r o p e r t y l a w i n I r e l a n d
( 4 t h e d ) D u b l i n : B l o o m s b u r y Professional, 2016 – N112 C5
J U D I C I A L R E V I E W
A u d i t i n g – N o n - co m p l i a n ce w i t h
a cco u n t i n g a n d a u d i t s t a n d a rd s –
Judicial review – Applied O’Keef fe v
A n B o r d P l e a n á l a [ 1 9 9 3 ] 1 I R 3 9 , Applied State (Keegan and Lysaght)
v S t a r d u s t V i c t i m s C o m p e n s a t i o n
Tr i b u n a l [ 1 9 8 6 ] I R 6 4 2 – ( R y a n P, Pear t J , Edwards J – 26/10/2016) – [2016] IECA 301
N o w a k v I r i s h A u d i t i n g a n d
Accounting Supervisory Authority
Judicial review – Dismissal – Assault
– A p p l i e d G a r d a J o h n Ke l l y v Commissioner of An Garda Síochána
[ 2 0 1 3 ] I E S C 4 7 , A p p l i e d M a l l a c k v Minister for Justice [2012] 3 IR 297 – (Denham C J , O’Donnell Donal J , M c Ke c h n i e J , C l a r ke J , L a f fo y J ,
D u n n e J , C h a r l e to n J –15/11/2016) – [2016] IESC 66
M c E n e r y v C o m m i s s i o n e r o f A n Garda Síochána
Judicial review – Eviction – Unlawful
w a r ra n t – A p p e l l a n t s e e k i n g j u d i c i a l review – Whether the eviction of the a p p e l l a n t w a s u n l a w f u l – A p p l i e d
S h e l l E & P I r e l a n d Lt d v M c G r a t h [ 2 0 1 3 ] 1 J I C 2 2 0 1 , Re fe r re d to M a n c h e s t e r C i t y C o u n c i l v P i n n o c k
(Secretar y of State for Communities
a n d Lo c a l G o v e r n m e n t i n te r v e n i n g )
[2011] 2 AC 104 – (Clarke J , Laffoy
J , O ’ M a l l e y J – 1 3 / 1 2 / 2 0 1 6 ) –
[2016] IESC 70
M
County Council
L AW R E F O R M
Librar y acquisitions
L a w Re fo r m C o m m i s s i o n L a w
Reform Commission issues paper no 11 – accessibility, consolidation and o n l i n e p u b l i c a t i o n o f l e g i s l a t i o n
D u b l i n : L a w Re fo r m C o m m i s s i o n , 2016 – L160 C5
Ar ticles
H
2016; (21) (6): 177
L E G A L H I S TO RY
Librar y acquisitions
Bacik, I , Rogan, M Legal cases that changed Ireland Dublin: Clarus Press Ltd , 2016 – L403
B y r n e , R B i n c h y, W A n n u a l r e v i e w of Irish law 2015 (2015 ed ) Dublin: T h o m s o n Re u te r s I re l a n d L i m i te d , 2016 – K1 C5
Ar ticles
Camps, F E The empire strikes back Law Society Gazette 2016; (Dec): 48
L E G A L P R O F E S S I O N
Librar y acquisitions
T h e B a r C o u n c i l T h e B a r d i r e c t
2 0 1 7 ( 2 0 1 7 e d ) Lo n d o n : S w e e t & Maxwell, 2016 – REF
Barniville, D, The Bar of Ireland CPD
L e g a l s e r v i c e s r e g u
Februar y 1, 2016 The Bar of Ireland
CPD: Dublin, 2016 – L130 46 C5
The Bar of Ireland CPD Disciplinary
p r o c e d u r e s f o r b a r r i s t e r s u n d e r t h e
Legal Services Regulation Act 2015:
February 22, 2016 The Bar of Ireland
CPD: Dublin, 2016 – L130 46 C5
Ar ticles
McDermott, M King of the hill Law
Society Gazette 2016; (Dec): 41
S a v a g e , B P re p a re fo r c h a n g e B a r
Review 2016; (21) (6): 184
Wa l s h , K T h e l a s t C o l l i n s L a w
Society Gazette 2016; (Nov): 46
Statutor y instruments
The European Communities (law yers’ e s t a b l i s h m e n t ) re g u l a t i o n s 2 0 0 3
( q u a l i f y i n g ce r t i f i c a te ) re g u l a t i o n s
2016 – SI 587/2016
T h e s o l i c i to r s a c t s 1 9 5 4 to 2 0 1 1
s o l i c i to r s ( p ra c t i s i n g ce r t i f i c a te ) regulations 2016 – SI 586/2016
L O CA L G OV E R N M E N T
Statutor y instruments
D u b l i n D o c k l a n d s D e v e l o p m e n t
A u t h o r i t y ( D i s s o l u t i o n ) A c t , 2 0 1 5
( D o c k l a n d s o v e r s i g h t a n d
co n s u l t a t i v e fo r u m – p re s c r i b e d
bodies) order 2016 – SI 565/2016
H o u s i n g a s s i s t a n ce p a y m e n t
( a m e n d m e n t ) ( n o 2 ) re g u l a t i o n s
2016 – SI 338/2016
H o u s i n g a s s i s t a n ce p a y m e n t
( a m e n d m e n t ) ( n o 3 ) re g u l a t i o n s
2016 – SI 354/2016
H o u s i n g a s s i s t a n ce p a y m e n t
( a m e n d m e n t ) ( n o 4 ) re g u l a t i o n s
2016 – SI 575/2016
Housing assistance payment (section
5 0 ) ( n o 2 ) re g u l a t i o n s 2 0 1 6 – S I
574/2016
N a t i o n a l o v e r s i g h t a n d a u d i t
co m m i s s i o n ( n u m b e r o f m e m b e r s )
order 2016 – SI 536/2016
S o c i a l h o u s i n g a l l o c a t i o n
( a m e n d m e n t ) re g u l a t i o n s 2 0 1 6 – S I
503/2016
N E G L I G E N C E
N e g l i g e n ce – A s s a u l t – B re a c h o f
co n s t i t u t i o n a l r i g h t s – A p p e l l a n t seeking damages – Whether adverse
j u r y f i n d i n g s w e re p e r v e r s e a n d
u n s u p p o r te d b y e v i d e n ce – A p p l i e d
B u c k l e y v M u l l i g a n [ 2 0 1 6 ] 1 0 J I C
0 4 0 1 , A p p l i e d O ’ C o n n o r v B u s A t h a
C l i a t h [ 2 0 0 3 ] 4 I R 4 5 9 – ( I r v i n e J , Hogan J , Hedigan J – 27/10/2016) – [2016] IECA 310
S a v i c k i s v G o v e r n o r o f C a s t l e r e a Prison
N e g l i g e n ce – S t a n d a rd o f c a re –
E v i d e n t i a l b a s i s – A p p l i e d S i d h u v
B r i t i s h A i r w a y s P l c [ 1 9 9 7 ] S C ( H L ) 2 6 , Re fe r re d to M c C r a c ke n v M c M a n u s [ 2 0 0 1 ] 1 1 J I C 2 1 0 2 –( R y a n P
15/12/2016) – [2016] IECA 384 Bell v Dublin Airport Authority plc
Librar y acquisitions
Powell, J L , Stewar t, R , Jackson, R M Jackson & Powell on professional liability (8th ed ) London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2017 – N33 7
Ar ticles
Dowling-Hussey, A Irish medical professional negligence claims and ADR: still under-used? Medico-Legal Journal of Ireland 2016; 22 (2): 88
PERSONAL INJURIES
Personal injuries – Professional negligence – Damages – Applied Barratt v Ansell (t/a as Woolf Seddon); Ar thur JS Hall and Co v Simons [2002] 1 AC 615, Referred to Murray v Budds [2015] 11 JIC 1907 – (Mahon J , Irvine J , Hogan J – 26/10/2016) – [2016] IECA 302 Vesey v Kent Carty
PERSONAL INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY
Statutory instruments
Personal insolvency act 2012 (renewal of authorisation of personal insolvency practitioners) regulations 2016 – SI 226/2016
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL LAW
Library acquisitions
Thomson Round Hall, Flanagan, D , Flynn, T , Dodd, S , Galligan, E , Spence, D , Simons, G Round Hall planning and environmental law conference 2016 Dublin: Round Hall, 2016 – N96 4 C5
Acts
Planning and Development (Housing) and Residential Tenancies Act 2016 –Act No 17 of 2016 – signed on December 23, 2016
Statutory instruments
Planning and development act 2000 (designation of strategic development zone: Poolbeg West, Dublin City) order 2016 – SI 279/2016
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
Practice and procedure – Costs –Taxation – Application for review of costs – (Denham C J , MacMenamin J , Laffoy J – 16/12/2016) – [2016] IESC 76
Horan v O’Reilly
Ar ticles
D o n n e l l y, M T h e a s s i s te d decision-making (capacity) act 2015: i m p l i c a t i o n s fo r h e a l t h c a re
d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g M e d i c o - L e g a l
Journal of Ireland 2016; 22 (2): 65
Lo m b a rd , J N a v i g a t i n g t h e
d e c i s i o n - m a k i n g f ra m e w o r k fo r
p a t i e n t s i n a m i n i m a l l y co n s c i o u s
s t a te M e d i c o - L e g a l J o u r n a l o f Ireland 2016; 22 (2): 78
Statutor y instruments
Assisted Decision-Making (Capacity) Act 2015 (commencement of cer tain
p ro v i s i o n s ) o rd e r 2 0 1 6 – S I 515/2016
B i l l s i n i t i a te d i n D á i l É i re a n n
d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d N o v e m b e r 1 0 , 2016, to Januar y 18, 2017
[ p m b ] : P r i v a te M e m b e r s ’ B i l l s a re
p ro p o s a l s fo r l e g i s l a t i o n i n I re l a n d
i n i t i a te d b y m e m b e r s o f t h e D á i l o r S e a n a d O t h e r B i l l s a re i n i t i a te d b y the Government
A n t i - E v i c t i o n s B i l l 2 0 1 6 – B i l l
1 1 6 / 2 0 1 6 [ p m b ] – D e p u t y R u t h
C o p p i n g e r, D e p u t y M i c k B a r r y, Deputy Paul Murphy, Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett, Deputy Bríd Smith and Deputy Gino Kenny
C i v i l L a w ( M i s s i n g Pe r s o n s ) ( N o 2 )
B i l l 2 0 1 6 – B i l l 1 1 2 / 2 0 1 6 [ p m b ] –
D e p u t y Pe a r s e D o h e r t y a n d D e p u t y Jonathan O’Brien
C o m m u n i c a t i o n s Re g u l a t i o n ( Po s t a l
S e r v i ce s ) ( A m e n d m e n t ) B i l l 2 0 1 6 –Bill 118/2016
C o u r t s ( N o 2 ) B i l l 2 0 1 6 – B i l l 120/2016
Disability (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2016 – Bill 119/2016
E m p l o y m e n t E q u a l i t y ( A b o l i t i o n o f M a n d a to r y Re t i re m e n t A g e ) B i l l
2 0 1 6 – B i l l 1 0 7 / 2 0 1 6 [ p m b ] –
Deputy John Brady
Fo s s i l F u e l D i v e s t m e n t B i l l 2 0 1 6 –
B i l l 1 0 3 / 2 0 1 6 [ p m b ] – D e p u t y Thomas Pringle
Hallmarking (Amendment) Bill 2016 – Bill 111/2016
H e a l t h I n s u ra n ce ( A m e n d m e n t ) B i l l 2016 – Bill 94/2016
I n to x i c a t i n g L i q u o r ( B re w e r i e s a n d Distilleries) Bill 2016 – Bill 104/2016 [pmb] – Deputy Alan Kelly
Lo c a l G o v e r n m e n t ( M a y o r a n d
Re g i o n a l A u t h o r i t y o f D u b l i n ) B i l l 2016 – Bill 98/2016 [pmb] – Deputy
E a m o n R y a n a n d D e p u t y C a t h e r i n e
Mar tin
P r i s o n s ( S o l i t a r y C o n f i n e m e n t )
( A m e n d m e n t ) B i l l 2 0 1 6 – B i l l 95/2016 [pmb] – Deputy Clare Daly
P ro h i b i t i o n o f H y d ra u l i c F ra c t u r i n g
( E x t ra c t i o n o f H y d ro c a r b o n ) B i l l
2016 – Bill 93/2016 [pmb] – Deputy
Richard Boyd Barrett
P ro h i b i t i o n o f M i c ro - P l a s t i c s B i l l
2 0 1 6 – B i l l 1 0 2 / 2 0 1 6 [ p m b ] –
Deputy Sean Sherlock
Re s i d e n t i a l Te n a n c i e s ( H o u s i n g
E m e rg e n c y M e a s u re s i n t h e P u b l i c
I n te
Smith, Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett
and Deputy Gino Kenny
Secure Rent and Tenancies Bill 2016
– Bill 99/2016 [pmb] – Deputy Eoin
Ó Broin
S
2016 – Bill 97/2016 [pmb] – Deputy
Jan O’Sullivan
B i l l s i n i t i a te d i n S e a n a d É i re a n n
d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d N o v e m b e r 1 0 ,
2016 to Januar y 18, 2017
A d o p t i o n ( I n fo r m a t i o n a n d Tra c i n g )
Bill 2016 – Bill 100/2016
Civil Liability (Amendment) Bill 2017 – Bill 1/2017
C o n v i c t i o n s fo r C e r t a i n S e x u a l
Offences (Apology and Exoneration)
B i l l 2 0 1 6 – B i l l 1 0 6 / 2 0 1 6 [ p m b ] –
S e n a to r G e ra l d N a s h , S e n a to r I v a n a
Bacik, Senator Kevin Humphreys and Senator Aodhán Ó Riordáin
M e n t a l H e a l t h ( A m e n d m e n t ) B i l l
2 0 1 6 – B i l l 1 1 3 / 2 0 1 6 [ p m b ] –
S e n a to r J o a n F re e m a n , S e n a to r
G e ra rd P C ra u g h w e l l a n d S e n a to r
Marie-Louise O’Donnell
P u b l i c B o d i e s Re v i e w A g e n c y B i l l
2 0 1 6 – B i l l 1 0 5 / 2 0 1 6 [ p m b ] –
S e n a to r Pá d ra i g Ó C é i d i g h , S e n a to r
G e ra rd P C ra u g h w e l l a n d S e n a to r
Rónán Mullen
P ro g re s s o f B i l l a n d B i l l s
a m e n d e d d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d
N o v e m b e r 1 0 , 2 0 1 6 to J a n u a r y 18, 2017
A d o p t i o n ( A m e n d m e n t ) B i l l 2 0 1 6 –
B i l l 2 3 / 2 0 1 3 – C o m m i t te e S t a g e –
Re p o r t S t a g e – Pa s s e d b y D á i l
Éireann
Companies (Accounting) Bill 2016 –Bill 79/2016 – Committee Stage
C o u r t s B i l l 2 0 1 6 – B i l l 8 6 / 2 0 1 6 –
Committee Stage – Repor t Stage
F i n a n ce B i l l 2 0 1 6 – B i l l 8 3 / 2 0 1 6 –
C o m m i t te e S t a g e - Re p o r t S t a g e –
Passed by Dáil Éireann
H e a l t h I n s u ra n ce ( A m e n d m e n t ) B i l l 2 0 1 6 – B i l l 9 4 / 2 0 1 6 – C o m m i t te e
Stage – Repor t Stage
J u d i c i a l A p p o i n t m e n t s C o m m i s s i o n
Bill 2016 – Bill 82/2016 – Committee
Stage P l a n n i n g a n d D e v e l o p m e n t (Housing) and Residential Tenancies
Bill 2016 – Bill 92/2016 – Committee
Stage (Initiated in Seanad) – Repor t Stage – Dáil (Initiated in Seanad)
Road Traffic Bill 2016 – Bill 3/2016 – Repor t Stage
S o c i a l We l f a re B i l l 2 0 1 6 – B i l l 91/2016 – Repor t Stage – Passed by Dáil Éireann
F o r u p - to - d a te i n fo r m a t i o n p l e a s e c h e c k t h e fo l l o w i n g websites: B i l l s a n d Le g i s l a t i o n –http://www oireachtas ie/parliamen t/
G o v e r n m e n t Le g i s l a t i o n P ro g ra m m e u p d a te d S e p te m b e r 2 7 , 2 0 1 6 –http://www taoiseach gov ie/eng/T aoiseach and Government/Govern ment Legislation Programme/
Supreme Cour t Determinations –leave to appeal granted
P u b l i s h e d o n C o u r t s i e –November 10, 2016 to December 31, 2016
Rogers v Sunday Newspapers Limited
a n d O r s – [ 2 0 1 6 ] I E S C D E T 1 3 7 –
Le a v e g ra n te d o n 1 7 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 6 –( C l a r ke J , M a c M e n a m i n J , L a f fo y J )
P e r m a n e n t T S B v L a n g a n – [ 2 0 1 6 ]
I E S C D E T 1 3 9 – Le a v e g ra n te d o n
1 7 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 6 – ( C l a r ke J , MacMenamin J , Laffoy J )
G i l c h r i s t v S u n d a y N e w s p a p e r s
L i m i t e d a n d o r s – [ 2 0 1 6 ] I E S C D E T 138 – Leave granted on 17/11/2016 – (Clarke J , MacMenamin J , Laffoy J )
R o s b e g P a r t n e r s v L K S h i e l d s ( A Firm) – [2016] IESCDET 143 – Leave g ra n te d o n 2 2 / 1 1 / 2 0 1 6 –(O’Donnell J , McKechnie J , Dunne J )
D i r e c t o r o f P u b l i c P r o s e c u t i o n s v
C a m p i o n – [ 2 0 1 6 ] I E S C D E T 1 4 7 –
Le a v e g ra n te d o n 7 / 1 2 / 2 0 1 6 –
( D e n h a m C J , O ’ D o n n e l l J , L a f fo y J , Dunne J , O’Malley J )
F o r u p - to - d a te i n fo r m a t i o n , p l e a s e c h e c k t h e co u r t s w e b s i te –http://www cour ts ie/Judgments ns f/FrmDeterminations?OpenForm&l= en
Litigants in person and the administration of justice
Litigants in person can create par ticular challenges for the cour ts, but there is much that can be done to suppor t them and assist the administration of justice.1
Litigants in person representing themselves in court is a long-established practice in this jurisdiction and the neighbouring common law jurisdictions While the courts have always exercised a degree of flexibility when litigants represent themselves in court, there are few formal structures and practice directions in place to assist the litigant in person or the opposing party The purpose of this paper is to analyse how the courts and the legal profession in other common law jurisdictions have addressed the issue and to suggest some changes that could be implemented by The Bar of Ireland, the Law Society, the judiciary and the Courts Service to help promote the proper administration of justice when it comes to litigants in person
Approach of the courts
The balancing exercise that a court needs to perform when faced with a litigant in person who insists on their right of self-representation was summarised by Clarke J in his judgment in the High Court in Burke v O’Halloran 2 The case concerned an application by the applicant during the course of a District Court prosecution to dispense with his professional legal representation and represent himself The respondent District Court judge refused the application, the case proceeded and the applicant was convicted The applicant then sought relief in the High Court by way of judicial review While expressing sympathy with the District Court judge,
Clarke J found in favour of the applicant and stated at paragraph 29 of the judgment:
“That an accused person in criminal proceedings has a right to represent him or herself seems to me to be axiomatic"
Clarke J summarised the position at paragraphs 31-33 of his judgment when he held:
“It cannot be that legal representation can be imposed on parties who do not wish to have it
In making this last comment I am more than mindful of the fact that all judges experience from time to time very great difficulty in having to handle proceedings where parties decide to represent themselves While courts have, for good reason, always been mindful to ensure that parties who do represent themselves are not unfairly prejudiced by that fact, it nonetheless has to be recorded that proceedings where parties represent themselves frequently become difficult to handle
Understandably lay litigants do not always understand the rules of procedure or evidence or the law applicable to the case in which they are involved Such parties frequently become frustrated when the court, even allowing some reasonable laxity in the application of those rules or that law, prevents them from doing or saying things that they wish in the course of the proceedings
These and many other factors often lead to such proceedings becoming disjointed, difficult and frequently much more lengthy than they would otherwise be Be that as it may, those factors, true as they are, do not justify depriving a party who wishes to represent him or herself from that opportunity In saying that, it does have to be noted that a party who chooses to represent him or herself is no less bound by the
Tomás Keys BL
laws of evidence and procedure and any other relevant laws, and by the rulings of the court in that regard, than any other party Where a party chooses to represent him or herself and where that party fails to abide by directions of the court concerning the manner in which the case should be conducted in accordance with procedural, evidential and any other relevant law, then the court must take whatever action is appropriate to deal with any such failure"
Case management
While the law is clear that any litigant in criminal or civil proceedings is entitled to exercise their right of self-representation, difficulties can arise as a result of the litigant in person not being familiar with court procedures These difficulties were clearly evident in the case of Talbot v Hermitage 3 In her judgment, Denham C J noted that the day that judgment was being delivered would constitute the “83rd day that the resources of the High Court and the Supreme Court have been directed towards this claim”
The Chief Justice observed at paragraph 16:
“ I consider that the Courts would benefit by a further development and use of case management so that the best use may be made of scarce court resources for the benefit of all litigants”
With the establishment of the new Court of Appeal on October 28, 2014, new case management protocols have been established in the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court The various practice directions regarding directions hearings, the filing of written legal submissions and lodging of books of appeal and books of authorities apply to litigants with professional legal representation and litigants in person alike Due to the constraints on resources, as noted by the principal registrar of the High Court on foot of representations made to the President of the High Court, certain provisions of SI No 255 of 2016 regarding chancery and non-jury actions are currently on hold 4
Enhancements of cour t procedures and provision of information
Notwithstanding the resource constraints, there have been some additional services and changes to practice and procedure within the past few years, which have been of some assistance to litigants in person
These include:
■ the provision of a specific section on the www courts ie website entitled 'High Court procedure';5
■ the provision of information booklets and staff from MABS and the Insolvency Service of Ireland who attend in the Circuit Court for possession matters;
■ the operation of a dedicated common law list for litigants in person each Monday in the High Court;
■ the provision of legal advice vouchers under the Mortgage Arrears Resolution Service Scheme (Abhaile);
■ the establishment of the Supreme Court Legal Assistance Scheme; and,
■ the case management of Circuit Court appeals to the High Court in Dublin before the Deputy Master of the non-jury list each Monday
There are also many practices that individual judges in the District Court, Circuit Court and High Court have put in place for the more efficient operation of the specific lists and to greatly assist litigants in person
Fake law websites
While many would be familiar with the proliferation of fake news websites during the most recent US presidential election cycle, there has been an equally disturbing trend of fake law websites in this jurisdiction and others The common theme running through these various websites is that the guru or group behind it profess to have a knowledge of the law that will greatly assist litigants in person and that their advice is preferable to that of professionally trained and regulated lawyers
Despite the recognition of the phenomenon of the Organised Pseudo Legal Commercial Arguments (“OPCA”) as identified by Rooke A C J in his seminal judgment in Meads v Meads6 in Alberta, the dangers posed to litigants in person adopting the nonsense arguments of the various OPCA gurus7 operating in and around the courts is not widely known in the general public
It appears that prior to the introduction of some of the debt advice services outlined above, the OPCA gurus managed to get a wide following from people who find themselves in severe financial difficulties, as there was nowhere else to turn to
While the filing of vexatious paperwork may have the effect of delaying bank enforcement proceedings, the additional costs end up being borne by the borrower and any equity left in a property could be destroyed
The various fake law websites and social media pages tout their successes with great fanfare (usually a lengthy adjournment) but fail to provide details of any of the losses that the litigants in person have suffered
The consequences for litigants in person of following the advice of these gurus can lead to large costs orders being made against them, the loss of their home, bankruptcy and even their imprisonment for contempt
In the case of Knowles v Governor of Limerick Prison, 8 the applicant was imprisoned for contempt of court by His Honour Judge Ó Donnabháin as a result of her failure to comply with an order for possession Despite many of the fake law websites making declarations at the time that the applicant’s imprisonment was unlawful, Humphreys J found otherwise During the course of his judgment, he made a finding that the applicant had been afforded numerous opportunities to seek professional legal representation but failed to do so The applicant was granted bail and ultimately afforded the opportunity to purge her contempt
In July 2015, The Irish Times reported9 that Mr Paul Codd was committed to prison for a second time as a result of his refusal to co-operate with the official assignee in bankruptcy A bench warrant had previously been issued for Mr Codd’s arrest on foot of the non co-operation and breach of undertakings On several occasions during 2014, people identifying themselves as “friends of Mr Codd’s” had sought to challenge the court’s jurisdiction to deal with the matter using some of the OPCA tactics that were being promoted at the time through the fake law websites It should be noted that Mr Codd later purged his contempt and gave an undertaking to co-operate with the official assignee
The Irish Times reported on January 16, 2017, that Noonan J questioned the quality of advice being given to litigants in person during the course of dealing with numerous judicial review applications by litigants in person challenging orders for possession granted by Circuit Court judges Each of the judicial review applications were dismissed The article reported that:
“The judge asked some of the applicants if they had got legal advice concerning their cases from ' a friend' or 'from the internet'
The court was told by a number of the personal litigants they had got advice from a 'friend', whose name was not disclosed to the court, when putting their challenges together
The judge remarked there is ' a lot of misinformation out there', adding such advice could damage a person’s chance of bringing an appeal against Circuit Court orders
He told one couple who brought a challenge he sympathised and felt sorry for them given the situation they had found themselves in While they were clearly 'decent people', he had no alternative but to dismiss their application, he said” 10
The role of McKenzie friends T h e co u r t s i n t h i s j
recognised the rights of litigants in person to have McKenzie friends in cour t to assist them The limits to what a McKenzie friend can and cannot do are set out in the Supreme Cour t judgment in Cof fey v Environmental Protection Agency 11 At paragraph 31 of his judgment, Fennelly J stated:
“There would be little point in subjecting the professions to [rigorous legal a n d p ro fe s s i o n a l t ra i n i n g ] i f, a t
persons had complete, parallel rights of audience in the cour ts That would d e fe a t t h e p u r p o s e o f s u c h co n t ro l s a
t h e administration of justice and the elaborate system of controls”
In Walsh v Minister for Justice and Equalit y, Humphreys J recognised the right of a layperson to apply for an inquir y under Ar ticle 40 at the ex par te stage However, in applying the dicta of the Supreme Cour t in Coffey, he ruled that only the applicant himself or a practising barrister or solicitor could run the application and address the cour t In that case, the McKenzie friend sought to rely on some form of “ power of attorney” to afford him a right of audience At paragraph 13 of his judgment Humphreys J stated:
“ S u c h a d o c u m e n t i s i r re l e v a n t to a r i g h t o f a
conceivably have any effect of conferring such a right To allow a power of attorney to confer a right of audience would simply be to drive a coach and fo u r t h ro u g h t h e p u b
[Cof fey v Environmental Protection Agency]"
Despite the ruling, it appears that many of the fake law websites are still inviting litigants in person to execute such documents
There is some anecdotal evidence in this jurisdiction of McKenzie friends charging for the advice they provide This can arise when a cour t makes an order for the litigant in person’s expenses and a bill for the McKenzie friend is then presented As a litigant in person is not entitled to an order for legal costs, it is doubtful that the Taxing Master or county registrar performing the role of taxing master would ever allow for such fees under the existing regime
Other jurisdictions
While it is welcome that new practices have been put in place in this jurisdiction, there are further initiatives that have been put in place in Northern Ireland, and England and Wales, which could be replicated here The Lord Chief Justice of Nor thern Ireland issued Practice Note 3/201213 as a result of the increased number of litigants in person appearing in the courts of Northern Ireland The Practice Note provides a summary of what McKenzie friends can and cannot do The Practice Note set out circumstances in which a litigant in person might be denied the assistance of a McKenzie friend Those circumstances are: i) the assistance is being provided for an improper purpose; ii) the assistance is unreasonable in nature or degree;
iii) the McKenzie friend is subject to an order such as a civil proceedings order or a civil restraint order or has been declared to be a vexatious litigant, by a cour t in Nor thern Ireland or in another jurisdiction of the United Kingdom; iv) the McKenzie friend is using the case to promote his or her own cause or
interests or those of some other person, group or organisation, and not the interests of the personal litigant; v) the McKenzie friend is directly or indirectly conducting the litigation; and, vi) the cour t is not satisfied that the McKenzie friend fully understands and will comply with the duty of confidentiality
In October 2013, the six County Court judges in England and Wales authored ‘A Handbook for Litigants in Person’ 14 The handbook covers a wide range of topics including practice in the County Court, Civil Procedure Rules and appeals over 22 chapters On June 4, 2015, the Law Society of England & Wales, the Chartered Institute of Legal Executives and the Bar Council of England & Wales issued guidelines and a case study in relation to litigants in person and McKenzie friends 15 The guidelines are provided for lawyers interacting with litigants in person A set of notes was also provided for litigants in person and for clients of lawyers in circumstances where litigants in person are on the other side There are currently proposals being debated in England and Wales for the provision of paid McKenzie friends In a speech delivered on December 5, 2016, Etherton M R hailed the importance of schemes for the provision of pro bono services:
“Schemes such as the Chancery BAR litigants-in-person suppor t scheme or CLIPs, the equivalent in the Queen’s Bench Division, the Insolvency pro bono ser vice, and the Cour t of Appeal pro bono scheme, are all providing an excellent level of suppor t for litigants-in-person; increasing their access to accessible guidance, advice and representation As such they help provide a level and type of suppor t – par ticularly where pro bono representation by qualified law yers is concerned under the various schemes – which is immeasurably better than that provided by unqualified and unregulated paid McKenzie friends In that regard, I can only echo the recent words of caution given by Lord Thomas, the Lord Chief Justice, that where such individuals
References
1 The author would like to thank Sara
SC and Mark
BL Any errors or omissions are the author's own
2 [2009] 3 IR 809
3 Unreported Supreme Court, October 9, 2014, Denham C J , Charlton J [2014] IESC 57
4 High Court Notice September 22, 2016 Available from: http://www courts ie/Courts ie/Library3 nsf/pagecurrent/3E33803598D813AF 8025803700520F83?opendocument
5 http://www courts ie/courts ie/library3 nsf/pagecurrent/04AA6AC36D48E36C8025804B00 59B994?opendocument&l=en&p=052
6 2012 ABQB 571
7 Rooke A C J noted that the OPCA gurus promote and sell techniques in order “to disrupt court operations and to attempt to frustrate the legal rights of governments, corporations, and individuals”
8 Unreported, High Court, January 25, 2016, Humphreys J [2016] IEHC 33
9 The Irish Times All-Ireland winning Wexford hurler Paul Codd is jailed July 6, 2015 Available from:
http://www irishtimes com/news/crime-and-law/courts/high-court/all-ireland-winning-wexfo rd-hurler-paul-codd-is-jailed-1 2287247
10 The Irish Times Judge criticises legal advice to people representing themselves January 16, 2017 Available from:
provide assistance there is a ‘real risk of exploitation’” 16
He later suggested that it would be preferable to have law graduates who have not secured pupillage to provide legal advice through various pro bono advice centres, all of whom would be supervised by qualified lawyers, and that this would be significantly preferable to allowing for paid McKenzie friends
Steps that could be taken in this jurisdiction
It is submitted that in the interest of the proper administration of justice in our cour ts, The Bar of Ireland along with the Law Society, the judiciary and the Cour ts Ser vice could do more to address the phenomenon of more litigants in person by adopting some of the initiatives in the neighbouring jurisdictions Currently, the Council of The Bar of Ireland is preparing guidelines for barristers in dealing with litigants in person and this is to be welcomed Some other possible initiatives are:
■ the publication by The Bar of Ireland and the Law Society of guidelines for litigants in person;
■ the presidents of each cour t could issue practice directions in relation to the role of McKenzie friends;17
■ an overhaul of the www cour ts ie website to make it more accessible to members of the public;
■ the establishment of a working group by the various rules committees of the District Cour t, Circuit Cour t and superior cour ts to ensure that the Rules of Cour t are consistent across all jurisdictions in relation to basic matters such as service and pleadings;
■ the dangers of the fake law websites and the OPCA gurus could also be highlighted through press briefings and case studies; and,
■ the Supreme Cour t Legal Assistance Scheme, if proven to be successful, could be expanded to cover the Cour t of Appeal
http://www irishtimes com/news/crime-and-law/courts/high-court/judge-critic ises-legal-advice-to-people-representing-themselves-1 2939247
11 [2014] 2 IR 125
12 Unrepor ted, High Cour t, June 13, 2016, Humphreys J [2016] IEHC 323
13 http://www cour tsni gov uk/en-gb/judicial%20decisions/practice%20direc tions/documents/practice%20note%2003-12/practice%20note%2003-12 htm
14 ‘A Handbook for Litigants in Person’ Available from: https://www judiciary gov uk/wp-content/uploads/JCO/Documents/Guid ance/A Handbook for Litigants in Person pdf
15 http://www lawsociety org uk/suppor t-services/advice/ar ticles/ litigants-in-person-new-guidelines-for-lawyers-june-2015/
16 Lecture by Sir Terence Ether ton MR: LawWorks Annual Pro Bono Awards lecture 2016 Available from: https://www judiciary gov uk/announcements /lecture-by-sir-terrence-ether ton-mr-lawworks-annual-pro-bonoawards-lecture-2016/
17 High Cour t Practice Direction 54 provides for the completion and lodgement of subscribed forms by litigants in person, which summarise the case Despite the provisions for costs orders for failure to comply, such orders are not being pursued and the provisions of the practice direction are not currently being relied upon
Moorhead
Tottenham
