Fuller & ors -v- Minister for Agriculture and Food & anor [2005] IESC 14 (16 March 2005)

Fuller & ors -v- Minister for Agriculture and Food & anor [2005] IESC 14 (16 March 2005)

Section 16 of the Civil Service Regulation Act 1956, when interpreted in its statutory context and according to its plain meaning, refers to physical absence from the place of work, not partial withdrawal from duties. Partial withdrawal from work duties does not constitute unauthorised absence from duty under section 16. The respondents' removal of the applicants from the payroll was ultra vires section 16.

Citation
[2005] IESC 14
Parties
Applicants/respondents: Marie Fuller, Anne-Marie Collins, Nuala O’Mahony, Carmel Kelleher, Brendan Farr, Margaret Collins, Gretta Coleman, Geraldine Hurley, Karen Murphy, Mairead Oconnell, Grete Hegarty, Brian O’Regan, Hugh O’Reilly, Deirdre Coomey; Respondents/appellants: Minister for Agriculture and Food and the Minister for Finance
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
16 March 2005
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (appeal) / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; High Court order affirmed
Legal Topics
Civil Service Discipline, Industrial Action, Statutory Construction, Payroll Suspension, Ultra Vires
Administrative Law Employment Law Statutory Interpretation Civil Service Discipline Industrial Action Statutory Construction Payroll Suspension Ultra Vires

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Marie Fuller, Anne-Marie Collins, Nuala O’Mahony, Carmel Kelleher, Brendan Farr, Margaret Collins, Gretta Coleman, Geraldine Hurley, Karen Murphy, Mairead Oconnell, Grete Hegarty, Brian O’Regan, Hugh O’Reilly, Deirdre Coomey

Applicants/respondents

Minister for Agriculture and Food and the Minister for Finance

Respondents/appellants

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (appeal) / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether partial withdrawal from work duties constitutes 'unauthorised absence from duty' under section 16 of the Civil Service Regulation Act 1956
  2. 2 Whether removal from payroll in these circumstances was ultra vires section 16
  3. 3 Whether disciplinary procedures under sections 13-15 should have been used instead

Ratio Decidendi

Section 16 of the Civil Service Regulation Act 1956, when interpreted in its statutory context and according to its plain meaning, refers to physical absence from the place of work, not partial withdrawal from duties. Partial withdrawal from work duties does not constitute unauthorised absence from duty under section 16. The respondents' removal of the applicants from the payroll was ultra vires section 16.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; High Court order affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Order of certiorari of the decision to remove applicants from payroll affirmed