Kelly v. O'Neill [1999] IESC 81; [2000] 1 IR 354; [2000] 1 ILRM 507 (2nd December, 1999)

Kelly v. O'Neill [1999] IESC 81; [2000] 1 IR 354; [2000] 1 ILRM 507 (2nd December, 1999)

It is open to a trial judge to find contempt of court for publication of prejudicial material after conviction but before sentence, even where the remaining proceedings are before a judge alone. The constitutional right to freedom of expression does not preclude such a finding where necessary to protect the administration of justice. The balance between freedom of expression and fair trial rights must be struck by the trial judge on the facts; the questions posed must be answered in the affirmative.

Citation
[1999] IESC 81
Parties
Applicant/respondent: Eamonn Kelly; Respondent/appellant: Paul O’Neill; Respondent/appellant: Conor Brady
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Procedural Posture
Consultative Case Stated (criminal Contempt) / Supreme Court Opinion on Questions From High Court Appeal of Circuit Court Contempt Order
Outcome
Questions answered in the affirmative; it can be contempt to publish such an article post-conviction and pre-sentence, subject to trial judge's assessment.
Legal Topics
Contempt of Court, Freedom of Expression, Sub Judice Rule, Sentencing, Press and Media Law
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Media Law Contempt of Court Freedom of Expression Sub Judice Rule Sentencing Press and Media Law

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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Eamonn Kelly

Applicant/respondent

Paul O’Neill

Respondent/appellant

Conor Brady

Respondent/appellant

Procedural Posture

Consultative Case Stated (criminal Contempt) / Supreme Court Opinion on Questions From High Court Appeal of Circuit Court Contempt Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether publication of a prejudicial article after conviction but before sentencing can constitute contempt of court
  2. 2 Whether the constitutional right to freedom of expression precludes contempt finding for such publication

Ratio Decidendi

It is open to a trial judge to find contempt of court for publication of prejudicial material after conviction but before sentence, even where the remaining proceedings are before a judge alone. The constitutional right to freedom of expression does not preclude such a finding where necessary to protect the administration of justice. The balance between freedom of expression and fair trial rights must be struck by the trial judge on the facts; the questions posed must be answered in the affirmative.

Court Disposition

Questions answered in the affirmative; it can be contempt to publish such an article post-conviction and pre-sentence, subject to trial judge's assessment.

Orders

  • It is open to the trial judge to determine, on all the circumstances, whether contempt of court has occurred.
  • The constitutional right to freedom of expression does not preclude a contempt finding in these circumstances.