Mooney -v- The Commissioner of An Garda Siochana & Ors [2017] IECA 277 (27 October 2017)

Mooney -v- The Commissioner of An Garda Siochana & Ors [2017] IECA 277 (27 October 2017)

The plaintiff was not owed a duty of care by the Gardaí in respect of psychological screening for the Witness Security Programme, and even if such a duty existed, no breach occurred. The plaintiff was not entitled to damages for negligence or misfeasance as the evidence did not support actionable unfairness or malice. The trial judge's findings and reasoning were adequate and supported by evidence.

Citation
[2017] IECA 277
Parties
Plaintiff / Appellant: David Mooney; Defendant / Respondent: The Commissioner of An Garda Síochána; Defendant / Respondent: Ireland; Defendant / Respondent: The Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
27 October 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Negligence, Duty of Care, Misfeasance in Public Office, Witness Security Programme, Fair Procedures
Tort Law Public Law Negligence Duty of Care Misfeasance in Public Office Witness Security Programme Fair Procedures

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Mooney

Plaintiff / Appellant

The Commissioner of An Garda Síochána

Defendant / Respondent

Ireland

Defendant / Respondent

The Attorney General

Defendant / Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Gardaí owed a duty of care to the plaintiff in the operation of the Witness Security Programme
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff was treated unfairly by the Gardaí
  3. 3 Whether the plaintiff was entitled to damages for alleged negligence or misfeasance in public office

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff was not owed a duty of care by the Gardaí in respect of psychological screening for the Witness Security Programme, and even if such a duty existed, no breach occurred. The plaintiff was not entitled to damages for negligence or misfeasance as the evidence did not support actionable unfairness or malice. The trial judge's findings and reasoning were adequate and supported by evidence.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No damages awarded to plaintiff
  • High Court judgment affirmed