Murray & Ors -v- The Minister for Education and Science & Ors [2017] IECA 216 (21 July 2017)

Murray & Ors -v- The Minister for Education and Science & Ors [2017] IECA 216 (21 July 2017)

The High Court has inherent jurisdiction to set aside a notice of discontinuance, but such jurisdiction should not be exercised where the discontinuance was a conscious, advised decision and setting aside would prejudice the defendants’ Statute of Limitations defence; the ECtHR judgment in O’Keeffe v. Ireland does not alter domestic law or create new causes of action for the plaintiffs.

Citation
[2017] IECA 216
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Paul Joseph Murray; Plaintiff/appellant: Richard Leonard; Plaintiff/appellant: John Allen; Plaintiff/appellant: Gerard Patrick Regan; Plaintiff/appellant: Eugene Heaphy; Defendant/respondent: The Minister for Education and Science; Defendant/respondent: Ireland; Defendant/respondent: The Attorney General; Defendant/respondent: Others (including Christian Brothers Order, school boards, individual members)
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
21 July 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Discontinuance of Proceedings, Inherent Jurisdiction, Statute of Limitations, Abuse of Process, European Convention on Human Rights
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Constitutional Law Human Rights Discontinuance of Proceedings Inherent Jurisdiction Statute of Limitations Abuse of Process +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 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Paul Joseph Murray

Plaintiff/appellant

Richard Leonard

Plaintiff/appellant

John Allen

Plaintiff/appellant

Gerard Patrick Regan

Plaintiff/appellant

Eugene Heaphy

Plaintiff/appellant

The Minister for Education and Science

Defendant/respondent

Ireland

Defendant/respondent

The Attorney General

Defendant/respondent

Others (including Christian Brothers Order, school boards, individual members)

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does the High Court have inherent jurisdiction to set aside or permit withdrawal of a notice of discontinuance under Order 26?
  2. 2 Should such jurisdiction be exercised in favour of the plaintiffs given the ECtHR judgment in O’Keeffe v. Ireland and alleged new evidence?

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court has inherent jurisdiction to set aside a notice of discontinuance, but such jurisdiction should not be exercised where the discontinuance was a conscious, advised decision and setting aside would prejudice the defendants’ Statute of Limitations defence; the ECtHR judgment in O’Keeffe v. Ireland does not alter domestic law or create new causes of action for the plaintiffs.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed; notices of discontinuance not set aside; no further orders.