O'Doherty & Anor v The Minister for Health & Ors (Approved) [2022] IESC 32_2 (05 July 2022)

O'Doherty & Anor v The Minister for Health & Ors (Approved) [2022] IESC 32_2 (05 July 2022)

The majority of the Supreme Court refused leave to appeal, holding that the applicants failed to advance an arguable case that the Covid-19 legislative measures were unconstitutional, particularly due to the absence of any scientific or medical evidence and the manner in which the case was pleaded. The Court found that the restrictions, though far-reaching, were enacted in response to a grave public health emergency and fell within the permissible range of legislative responses. The presumption of constitutionality applied, and the applicants did not overcome it. The minority judgment (Hogan J) considered that important constitutional issues were raised regarding the proportionality of...

Citation
[2022] IESC 32_2
Parties
Applicant/appellant: Gemma O'Doherty; Applicant/appellant: John Waters; Respondent/respondent: Minister for Health; Respondent/respondent: Ireland; Respondent/respondent: Attorney General; Notice Party: Dáil Éireann; Notice Party: Seanad Éireann; Notice Party: An Ceann Comhairle
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
05 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (application for Leave) / Supreme Court Appeal From Refusal of Leave by High Court and Court of Appeal
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Proportionality of Emergency Legislation, Freedom of Assembly, Personal Liberty, Inviolability of the Dwelling, Presumption of Constitutionality, Standing in Constitutional Challenges, Scope of Judicial Review, Interpretation of Emergency Powers
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Public Health Law Proportionality of Emergency Legislation Freedom of Assembly Personal Liberty Inviolability of the Dwelling Presumption of Constitutionality +3 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 5 Authorities cited 31 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gemma O'Doherty

Applicant/appellant

John Waters

Applicant/appellant

Minister for Health

Respondent/respondent

Ireland

Respondent/respondent

Attorney General

Respondent/respondent

Dáil Éireann

Notice Party

Seanad Éireann

Notice Party

An Ceann Comhairle

Notice Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (application for Leave) / Supreme Court Appeal From Refusal of Leave by High Court and Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Health Act 2020 and Emergency Measures Act 2020 and regulations thereunder were unconstitutional as disproportionate restrictions on constitutional rights during the Covid-19 pandemic
  2. 2 Whether the absence of expert evidence precluded an arguable case for leave to challenge the legislation
  3. 3 Whether the measures impermissibly restricted freedom of assembly, personal liberty, and inviolability of the dwelling

Ratio Decidendi

The majority of the Supreme Court refused leave to appeal, holding that the applicants failed to advance an arguable case that the Covid-19 legislative measures were unconstitutional, particularly due to the absence of any scientific or medical evidence and the manner in which the case was pleaded. The Court found that the restrictions, though far-reaching, were enacted in response to a grave public health emergency and fell within the permissible range of legislative responses. The presumption of constitutionality applied, and the applicants did not overcome it. The minority judgment (Hogan J) considered that important constitutional issues were raised regarding the proportionality of...

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • No leave granted to challenge the constitutionality of the Health Act 2020 and Emergency Measures Act 2020 and regulations thereunder.
  • No order as to costs specified in this judgment.