Waldron v. Early & Anor [2004] IEHC 227 (15 June 2004)

Waldron v. Early & Anor [2004] IEHC 227 (15 June 2004)

The application for judicial review is refused because the proceedings are oppressive, vexatious, and an abuse of process, the application is out of time and the delay is inordinate and inexcusable, and the issues raised are res judicata due to prior judicial review proceedings. There was no lack of jurisdiction in the Circuit Court's determination, and no good reason was shown to excuse the delay.

Citation
[2004] IEHC 227
Parties
Applicant: Ciaran Waldron; Second Named Respondent: District Judge William Early; Third Named Respondent: His Honour Judge Matthew Deery
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
15 June 2004
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment on Application for Judicial Review
Outcome
Application for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Res Judicata, Issue Estoppel, Delay in Judicial Review, Certiorari, Prohibition, Abuse of Process, Road Traffic Offences
Administrative Law Criminal Law Judicial Review Res Judicata Issue Estoppel Delay in Judicial Review Certiorari Prohibition +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 5 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ciaran Waldron

Applicant

District Judge William Early

Second Named Respondent

His Honour Judge Matthew Deery

Third Named Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment on Application for Judicial Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant is entitled to judicial review (certiorari and prohibition) of District and Circuit Court orders relating to driving disqualification and criminal convictions
  2. 2 Whether the application is barred by res judicata or issue estoppel
  3. 3 Whether the application is out of time and if delay is excusable

Ratio Decidendi

The application for judicial review is refused because the proceedings are oppressive, vexatious, and an abuse of process, the application is out of time and the delay is inordinate and inexcusable, and the issues raised are res judicata due to prior judicial review proceedings. There was no lack of jurisdiction in the Circuit Court's determination, and no good reason was shown to excuse the delay.

Court Disposition

Application for judicial review refused

Orders

  • Reliefs of certiorari and prohibition refused
  • Applicant to pay costs of first-named Respondent