McCrystal v The Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, The Government of Ireland, Ireland and the Attorney General [2012] IESC 53 (08 November 2012)

McCrystal v The Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, The Government of Ireland, Ireland and the Attorney General [2012] IESC 53 (08 November 2012)

The Supreme Court held that the correct test is whether there was a clear disregard of the McKenna principles, not whether the breach was 'blatant and egregious.' The Minister's information campaign, funded by public monies, was not fair, equal, impartial, or neutral, and thus breached the constitutional requirements established in McKenna. The High Court erred in applying an incorrect test and in finding no breach. The appeal was allowed and the High Court decision set aside.

Citation
[2012] IESC 53
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Mark McCrystal; Defendant/respondent: Minister for Children and Youth Affairs; Defendant/respondent: Government of Ireland; Defendant/respondent: Ireland; Defendant/respondent: Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
08 November 2012
Procedural Posture
Constitutional/administrative Law Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court decision set aside
Legal Topics
Referendum Process, Use of Public Funds, Equality in Electoral Process, Government Neutrality, Judicial Review
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Electoral Law Referendum Process Use of Public Funds Equality in Electoral Process Government Neutrality Judicial Review

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mark McCrystal

Plaintiff/appellant

Minister for Children and Youth Affairs

Defendant/respondent

Government of Ireland

Defendant/respondent

Ireland

Defendant/respondent

Attorney General

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional/administrative Law Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the correct legal test for court intervention in government conduct during a referendum campaign?
  2. 2 Did the Minister's information campaign breach the McKenna principles by using public funds to promote a particular referendum outcome?

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the correct test is whether there was a clear disregard of the McKenna principles, not whether the breach was 'blatant and egregious.' The Minister's information campaign, funded by public monies, was not fair, equal, impartial, or neutral, and thus breached the constitutional requirements established in McKenna. The High Court erred in applying an incorrect test and in finding no breach. The appeal was allowed and the High Court decision set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court decision set aside

Orders

  • Declaration that respondents acted wrongfully in expending or arranging to expend public monies on the website, booklet, and advertisements for the purpose of promoting a particular result in the referendum.
  • No injunction granted as respondents ceased distribution of the material.