Ernst & Young -v- Purcell & Anor [2011] IEHC 203 (13 May 2011)

Ernst & Young -v- Purcell & Anor [2011] IEHC 203 (13 May 2011)

The application for leave to seek certiorari was refused due to inexcusable delay and lack of merit, as the definition of 'complaint' in the Bye-Laws was satisfied and there was no ultra vires appointment. The applicant was not entitled to the additional procedural rights claimed at the Special Investigator stage under natural justice or legitimate expectation, as established by authority. No good reason was shown for the delay, and the process adopted was fair and in accordance with the Bye-Laws.

Citation
[2011] IEHC 203
Parties
Applicant: Ernst & Young; First Respondent: John Purcell; Second Respondent: The Institute of Chartered Accountants in Ireland
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
13 May 2011
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review
Outcome
Leave to apply for judicial review refused
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Natural Justice, Legitimate Expectation, Disciplinary Procedures, Ultra Vires, Delay in Judicial Review
Administrative Law Professional Discipline Judicial Review Natural Justice Legitimate Expectation Disciplinary Procedures Ultra Vires Delay in Judicial Review

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 19 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ernst & Young

Applicant

John Purcell

First Respondent

The Institute of Chartered Accountants in Ireland

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Application for Leave to Apply for Judicial Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appointment of the Special Investigator was ultra vires the powers of the Institute under its Bye-Laws
  2. 2 Whether the applicant was entitled to additional procedural rights at the Special Investigator stage under natural justice or legitimate expectation
  3. 3 Whether the application for leave was brought within the required time limits or justified for extension

Ratio Decidendi

The application for leave to seek certiorari was refused due to inexcusable delay and lack of merit, as the definition of 'complaint' in the Bye-Laws was satisfied and there was no ultra vires appointment. The applicant was not entitled to the additional procedural rights claimed at the Special Investigator stage under natural justice or legitimate expectation, as established by authority. No good reason was shown for the delay, and the process adopted was fair and in accordance with the Bye-Laws.

Court Disposition

Leave to apply for judicial review refused