Tracey & anor v Crosbie & Anor [2019] IESC 71 (30 July 2019)

Tracey & anor v Crosbie & Anor [2019] IESC 71 (30 July 2019)

The High Court proceedings were an abuse of process as they duplicated issues already litigated or pending in the Circuit Court. The claims against the State respondents were unsupported by any evidence and barred by judicial immunity. The orders dismissing the claims and restraining further proceedings were justified and affirmed, with a limitation that restrains only re-litigation of the same issues without leave of the President of the High Court.

Citation
[2019] IESC 71
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Kevin Tracey; Plaintiff/appellant: Karen Tracey; Defendant/respondent: Patrick Crosbie; Defendant/respondent: James Graham; Defendant/respondent: Crosbie & Graham Auctioneers; Defendant/respondent: Noel Tierney; Defendant/respondent: Joseph Smith; Defendant/respondent: John O'Hagan; Defendant/respondent: Ireland; Defendant/respondent: The Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
30 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court Orders
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Duplicative Proceedings, Judicial Immunity, Costs, Isaac Wunder Order
Civil Procedure Property Law Constitutional Law Abuse of Process Duplicative Proceedings Judicial Immunity Costs Isaac Wunder Order

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

Parties

Kevin Tracey

Plaintiff/appellant

Karen Tracey

Plaintiff/appellant

Patrick Crosbie

Defendant/respondent

James Graham

Defendant/respondent

Crosbie & Graham Auctioneers

Defendant/respondent

Noel Tierney

Defendant/respondent

Joseph Smith

Defendant/respondent

John O'Hagan

Defendant/respondent

Ireland

Defendant/respondent

The Attorney General

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court proceedings constituted an abuse of process by duplicating issues already litigated in the Circuit Court
  2. 2 Whether the orders dismissing the claims and restraining further proceedings were justified
  3. 3 Whether the non-attendance of the appellants in the High Court was sufficiently explained

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court proceedings were an abuse of process as they duplicated issues already litigated or pending in the Circuit Court. The claims against the State respondents were unsupported by any evidence and barred by judicial immunity. The orders dismissing the claims and restraining further proceedings were justified and affirmed, with a limitation that restrains only re-litigation of the same issues without leave of the President of the High Court.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • High Court orders affirmed except for general Isaac Wunder order, which is limited to restraining re-litigation of the same issues without leave of the President of the High Court
  • Appellants restrained from instituting proceedings on the same issues without leave