Tracey v Irish Times Ltd & Ors [2019] IESC 62 (30 July 2019)

Tracey v Irish Times Ltd & Ors [2019] IESC 62 (30 July 2019)

The Supreme Court held that while the High Court had material explaining the appellant's absence, the case was not so lacking in merit as to be bound to fail. There was an arguable issue as to whether the article was a fair and accurate report and whether privilege applied to all of it. The High Court should have considered a lesser order than outright dismissal. The appeal was allowed and the matter remitted to the High Court for determination.

Citation
[2019] IESC 62
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Kevin Tracey; Defendant/respondent: Irish Times Limited; Defendant/respondent: Geraldine Kennedy; Defendant/respondent: Eoin McVeigh
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
30 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court Dismissal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court order set aside; case remitted to High Court for determination in accordance with law.
Legal Topics
Privilege in Reporting Court Proceedings, Strike Out Applications, Adjournment for Illness, Proportionality in Procedural Orders, Fair and Accurate Reporting, Self Represented Litigants
Defamation Media Law Civil Procedure Privilege in Reporting Court Proceedings Strike Out Applications Adjournment for Illness Proportionality in Procedural Orders Fair and Accurate Reporting +1 more

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

Parties

Kevin Tracey

Plaintiff/appellant

Irish Times Limited

Defendant/respondent

Geraldine Kennedy

Defendant/respondent

Eoin McVeigh

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court Dismissal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court erred in dismissing the proceedings in the absence of the appellant
  2. 2 Whether the defence of privilege under s.18 of the Defamation Act 1961 was absolute and applied to the article
  3. 3 Whether the article was a fair and accurate report of court proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that while the High Court had material explaining the appellant's absence, the case was not so lacking in merit as to be bound to fail. There was an arguable issue as to whether the article was a fair and accurate report and whether privilege applied to all of it. The High Court should have considered a lesser order than outright dismissal. The appeal was allowed and the matter remitted to the High Court for determination.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court order set aside; case remitted to High Court for determination in accordance with law.

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed.
  • The High Court order dismissing the proceedings is set aside.