McMullen v Kennedy p/a Giles J. Kennedy & Co. Solicitors [2013] IESC 29 (13 June 2013)

McMullen v Kennedy p/a Giles J. Kennedy & Co. Solicitors [2013] IESC 29 (13 June 2013)

There was no credible evidence that Mr. Kennedy's improper conduct resulted in Mr. Clancy giving false or influenced testimony, nor that Mr. Clancy attempted to persuade Mr. McMullen to withdraw proceedings. The chain of causation was not established, and the burden of proof was not met. Improper conduct alone does not constitute a cause of action without proof of consequence.

Citation
[2013] IESC 29
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Michael Colin Geoffrey McMullen; Defendant/respondent: Giles J. Kennedy practising as Giles J. Kennedy & Company Solicitors
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
13 June 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Dismissal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; High Court order affirmed
Legal Topics
Undue Influence, Right to Fair Trial, Solicitor Conduct, Barrister Confidentiality, Conspiracy, Burden of Proof
Civil Procedure Professional Negligence Legal Ethics Undue Influence Right to Fair Trial Solicitor Conduct Barrister Confidentiality Conspiracy +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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael Colin Geoffrey McMullen

Plaintiff/appellant

Giles J. Kennedy practising as Giles J. Kennedy & Company Solicitors

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Dismissal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr. Kennedy's conduct constituted undue influence, improper incentives, or coercion affecting Mr. Clancy's testimony
  2. 2 Whether Mr. Kennedy's actions resulted in denial of Mr. McMullen's right to a fair trial
  3. 3 Whether there was evidence of conspiracy or breach of fiduciary duty

Ratio Decidendi

There was no credible evidence that Mr. Kennedy's improper conduct resulted in Mr. Clancy giving false or influenced testimony, nor that Mr. Clancy attempted to persuade Mr. McMullen to withdraw proceedings. The chain of causation was not established, and the burden of proof was not met. Improper conduct alone does not constitute a cause of action without proof of consequence.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; High Court order affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • High Court judgment affirmed