Shatter -v- Guerin [2015] IEHC 301 (20 May 2015)

Shatter -v- Guerin [2015] IEHC 301 (20 May 2015)

The respondent's report was a preliminary, non-binding expert opinion prepared under urgent terms of reference for the Government, with no legal effect or determinative findings. The respondent was not required to afford the applicant the full panoply of fair procedures, including notice or opportunity to respond, given the nature, scope, and urgency of the review. The report was not justiciable at the suit of the applicant, and no relief was warranted.

Citation
[2015] IEHC 301
Parties
Applicant: Alan Shatter; Respondent: Sean Guerin
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
20 May 2015
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment at High Court
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Fair Procedures, Natural Justice, Judicial Review, Ultra Vires, Reputational Damage, Terms of Reference, Bias, Justiciability
Administrative Law Constitutional Law Fair Procedures Natural Justice Judicial Review Ultra Vires Reputational Damage Terms of Reference +2 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 36 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alan Shatter

Applicant

Sean Guerin

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment at High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent breached fair procedures and natural justice by making adverse findings about the applicant without affording him an opportunity to respond
  2. 2 Whether the respondent acted ultra vires the terms of reference in drawing conclusions about the applicant
  3. 3 Whether the report is justiciable and amenable to judicial review

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent's report was a preliminary, non-binding expert opinion prepared under urgent terms of reference for the Government, with no legal effect or determinative findings. The respondent was not required to afford the applicant the full panoply of fair procedures, including notice or opportunity to respond, given the nature, scope, and urgency of the review. The report was not justiciable at the suit of the applicant, and no relief was warranted.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • No order of certiorari granted
  • No order of mandamus granted