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 that publication of prejudicial material after conviction but before sentence may constitute contempt of court, notwithstanding that sentencing is by a judge alone and the judge declares himself unaffected. The law requires balancing the administration of justice and freedom of expression. The questions posed—whether such publication can or could be contempt—are answered in the affirmative. The final determination depends on all the circumstances, including matters not yet established or argued, and is for the trial judge to decide.

Citation
[2000] 1 ILRM 507
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 Order
Outcome
Questions answered in the affirmative; matter remitted to trial judge for determination on the facts.
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 15 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 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 a finding of contempt in such circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

It is open to a trial judge to find that publication of prejudicial material after conviction but before sentence may constitute contempt of court, notwithstanding that sentencing is by a judge alone and the judge declares himself unaffected. The law requires balancing the administration of justice and freedom of expression. The questions posed—whether such publication can or could be contempt—are answered in the affirmative. The final determination depends on all the circumstances, including matters not yet established or argued, and is for the trial judge to decide.

Court Disposition

Questions answered in the affirmative; matter remitted to trial judge for determination on the facts.

Orders

  • It is open to the trial judge to find contempt of court in such circumstances.
  • The trial judge must consider all the circumstances and defences before making a final determination.