The Director of Public Prosecutions v D W (Approved) [2026] IECA 1 (13 January 2026)

The Director of Public Prosecutions v D W (Approved) [2026] IECA 1 (13 January 2026)

There was no jurisdictional error in accepting the late respondents' notice; no fundamental denial of justice or violation of constitutionally protected rights occurred; extension of time was justified and no prejudice was suffered by appellants.

Citation
[2026] IECA 1
Parties
Appellant: Gerard Dowling; Appellant: Padraig McManus; Appellant: Piotr Skoczylas; Appellant: Scotchstone Capital Fund Limited; Respondent: Ireland; Respondent: Attorney General; Respondent: Minister for Finance
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
13 January 2026
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application to Vary or Rescind Final Judgment
Outcome
application refused
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Late Filing, Fair Administration of Justice, Jurisdiction to Rescind or Vary Orders
Civil Procedure Constitutional Law Extension of Time Late Filing Fair Administration of Justice Jurisdiction to Rescind or Vary Orders

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 2 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gerard Dowling

Appellant

Padraig McManus

Appellant

Piotr Skoczylas

Appellant

Scotchstone Capital Fund Limited

Appellant

Ireland

Respondent

Attorney General

Respondent

Minister for Finance

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application to Vary or Rescind Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Registrar had jurisdiction to accept late filing of respondents' notice
  2. 2 Whether extension of time for filing respondents' notice was justified
  3. 3 Whether there was a fundamental denial of justice or violation of constitutionally protected rights

Ratio Decidendi

There was no jurisdictional error in accepting the late respondents' notice; no fundamental denial of justice or violation of constitutionally protected rights occurred; extension of time was justified and no prejudice was suffered by appellants.

Court Disposition

application refused

Orders

  • Application to vary or rescind final judgment refused