C v C.J. (Approved) [2022] IECA 24 (02 February 2022)

C v C.J. (Approved) [2022] IECA 24 (02 February 2022)

The appellant failed to provide any evidence beyond mere assertion to support the contention that Dr. Casey acted in bad faith or without reasonable care. No expert report or independent evidence was produced despite the passage of time. The court was satisfied that the intended proceedings were frivolous and had no reasonable chance of success, and therefore leave to commence proceedings was refused.

Citation
[2022] IECA 24
Parties
Appellant: C; Respondent: John Casey
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
02 February 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Refusal of Leave to Commence Proceedings Under S.73 Mental Health Act 2001
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Leave to Commence Proceedings, Involuntary Detention, Bad Faith, Reasonable Care, Professional Negligence, Access to Courts, Statutory Interpretation
Mental Health Law Civil Procedure Tort Law Leave to Commence Proceedings Involuntary Detention Bad Faith Reasonable Care Professional Negligence +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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

C

Appellant

John Casey

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Refusal of Leave to Commence Proceedings Under S.73 Mental Health Act 2001

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant should be granted leave under s.73 of the Mental Health Act 2001 to commence proceedings against the respondent for alleged wrongful recommendation of involuntary admission.
  2. 2 Whether there are reasonable grounds for contending that the respondent acted in bad faith or without reasonable care.
  3. 3 Whether the intended proceedings are frivolous or vexatious.

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant failed to provide any evidence beyond mere assertion to support the contention that Dr. Casey acted in bad faith or without reasonable care. No expert report or independent evidence was produced despite the passage of time. The court was satisfied that the intended proceedings were frivolous and had no reasonable chance of success, and therefore leave to commence proceedings was refused.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Leave to commence proceedings against Dr. Casey under s.73 Mental Health Act 2001 refused.
  • Appellant to pay respondent's costs of the leave application.