Mannion v The Legal Aid Board & Ors [2019] IECA 42 (20 February 2019)

Mannion v The Legal Aid Board & Ors [2019] IECA 42 (20 February 2019)

The appellant's claims against the State respondents are either bound to fail, have already been determined in previous proceedings, or could have been brought in those proceedings. The principles of res judicata, the rule in Henderson v. Henderson, and the law on frivolous and vexatious proceedings all apply. No error was found in the High Court's decision to strike out the proceedings.

Citation
[2019] IECA 42
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Dolores Mannion; 1st Defendant: The Legal Aid Board; 2nd Defendant/respondent: The Minister for Justice and Law Reform; 3rd Defendant/respondent: The Attorney General; 4th Defendant/respondent: Ireland
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
20 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From High Court Order Striking Out Proceedings
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Res Judicata, Frivolous and Vexatious Proceedings, Strike Out Applications, Constitutionality of Statutes, Civil Legal Aid
Civil Procedure Constitutional Law Res Judicata Frivolous and Vexatious Proceedings Strike Out Applications Constitutionality of Statutes Civil Legal Aid

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dolores Mannion

Plaintiff/appellant

The Legal Aid Board

1st Defendant

The Minister for Justice and Law Reform

2nd Defendant/respondent

The Attorney General

3rd Defendant/respondent

Ireland

4th Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From High Court Order Striking Out Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant's claims against the State respondents are unsustainable, bound to fail, frivolous or vexatious
  2. 2 Whether the claims are barred by res judicata or the rule in Henderson v. Henderson
  3. 3 Whether new causes of action arose after the 2006 proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant's claims against the State respondents are either bound to fail, have already been determined in previous proceedings, or could have been brought in those proceedings. The principles of res judicata, the rule in Henderson v. Henderson, and the law on frivolous and vexatious proceedings all apply. No error was found in the High Court's decision to strike out the proceedings.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; High Court order striking out proceedings against the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th defendants affirmed