Connors v Feshea & Ors (Approved) [2024] IEHC 431 (12 July 2024)

Connors v Feshea & Ors (Approved) [2024] IEHC 431 (12 July 2024)

Once the applicant withdrew his action in the District Court, he lost the right to challenge the preliminary evidential ruling by way of judicial review. The ruling ceased to have legal effect when the case was struck out, and there was no longer a live controversy or lis to support declaratory relief against the State. The correct procedure would have been to proceed with the action and, if unsuccessful, appeal or seek judicial review of the final judgment.

Citation
[2024] IEHC 431
Parties
Applicant: John Connors; First Respondent: Feshea Limited; Second Respondent: Ireland; Third Respondent: The Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
12 July 2024
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / High Court Judgment on Application for Certiorari and Declaratory Reliefs
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Burden of Proof, Discrimination, Race Equality Directive, Transposition of EU Directives, Protective Costs Orders, Locus Standi
Administrative Law Equality Law EU Law Civil Procedure Judicial Review Burden of Proof Discrimination Race Equality Directive +3 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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Connors

Applicant

Feshea Limited

First Respondent

Ireland

Second Respondent

The Attorney General

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / High Court Judgment on Application for Certiorari and Declaratory Reliefs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a party can challenge a preliminary evidential ruling by judicial review after withdrawing from the underlying civil action
  2. 2 Whether the Intoxicating Liquor Act 2003 should be interpreted to include a reversal of the burden of proof in line with the Race Equality Directive
  3. 3 Whether the State failed to properly transpose the Race Equality Directive into Irish law

Ratio Decidendi

Once the applicant withdrew his action in the District Court, he lost the right to challenge the preliminary evidential ruling by way of judicial review. The ruling ceased to have legal effect when the case was struck out, and there was no longer a live controversy or lis to support declaratory relief against the State. The correct procedure would have been to proceed with the action and, if unsuccessful, appeal or seek judicial review of the final judgment.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • All reliefs sought by the applicant are refused
  • Parties to furnish written submissions on final order and costs within two weeks