O'Keefe & Anor v Governor and Guardians of The Hospital for the Relief of The Poor Lying-In Women Dublin (Approved) [2023] IECA 78 (30 March 2023)

O'Keefe & Anor v Governor and Guardians of The Hospital for the Relief of The Poor Lying-In Women Dublin (Approved) [2023] IECA 78 (30 March 2023)

The High Court erred in refusing discovery based on assumed confidentiality and public interest without any evidential foundation. Once relevance is established, the onus is on the party resisting discovery to provide evidence of confidentiality and its extent. In the absence of such evidence, discovery should be ordered.

Citation
[2023] IECA 78
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Cliona O’Keeffe; Plaintiff/appellant: Alan Doran; Defendant/respondent: The Governors and Guardians of the Hospital for the Relief of the Poor Lying-In Women, Dublin
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
30 March 2023
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Interlocutory Order of the High Court
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Discovery of Documents, Confidentiality, Public Interest Privilege, Medical Negligence, Wrongful Death
Civil Procedure Medical Negligence Discovery Discovery of Documents Confidentiality Public Interest Privilege Wrongful Death

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cliona O’Keeffe

Plaintiff/appellant

Alan Doran

Plaintiff/appellant

The Governors and Guardians of the Hospital for the Relief of the Poor Lying-In Women, Dublin

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Interlocutory Order of the High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court erred in refusing discovery of statements made to a hospital inquiry into a patient's death on grounds of confidentiality and public interest without evidential basis.
  2. 2 Whether relevance and necessity for discovery were established and whether confidentiality was proven.

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court erred in refusing discovery based on assumed confidentiality and public interest without any evidential foundation. Once relevance is established, the onus is on the party resisting discovery to provide evidence of confidentiality and its extent. In the absence of such evidence, discovery should be ordered.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order for discovery of the contested documents (statements made to the hospital inquiry) granted to the plaintiffs.