Logue v. Redmond [1999] IEHC 220; [1999] 2 ILRM 498 (4th March, 1999)

Logue v. Redmond [1999] IEHC 220; [1999] 2 ILRM 498 (4th March, 1999)

With the exception of two documents (numbers 15 and 20) which contain or seek legal advice and are privileged, the documents in the three categories are not protected by legal professional privilege or public interest immunity and must be disclosed. The court found that the balance of public interest favored disclosure, as the documents did not fall within classes that would automatically justify non-disclosure, such as those assisting criminals or containing confidential informant information.

Citation
[1999] IEHC 220
Parties
Plaintiff: Donal Logue; Defendant: Sergeant D Redmond; Defendant: Garda Kealy
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application for Inspection and Disclosure of Documents Claimed as Privileged
Outcome
Application granted in part
Legal Topics
Discovery, Legal Professional Privilege, Public Interest Immunity, False Imprisonment, Defamation, Wrongful Arrest, Breach of Constitutional Rights
Civil Procedure Constitutional Law Tort Law Discovery Legal Professional Privilege Public Interest Immunity False Imprisonment Defamation +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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Donal Logue

Plaintiff

Sergeant D Redmond

Defendant

Garda Kealy

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application for Inspection and Disclosure of Documents Claimed as Privileged

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether documents listed in the defendants' affidavit of discovery are protected by legal professional privilege or public interest immunity and thus exempt from disclosure
  2. 2 Whether the balance of public interest justifies non-disclosure of the documents

Ratio Decidendi

With the exception of two documents (numbers 15 and 20) which contain or seek legal advice and are privileged, the documents in the three categories are not protected by legal professional privilege or public interest immunity and must be disclosed. The court found that the balance of public interest favored disclosure, as the documents did not fall within classes that would automatically justify non-disclosure, such as those assisting criminals or containing confidential informant information.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part

Orders

  • All documents in the three categories, except for documents 15 and 20, must be disclosed to the plaintiff.