Searson v Dublin City Council & Ors (No. 1) [2020] IEHC 74 (21 February 2020)

Searson v Dublin City Council & Ors (No. 1) [2020] IEHC 74 (21 February 2020)

The plaintiff's claim against the second to fourteenth defendants was bound to fail as they did not deal with his complaint, and there was no evidence or basis for alleging conspiracy or breach of rights. The proceedings were frivolous and vexatious and disclosed no reasonable cause of action.

Citation
[2020] IEHC 74
Parties
Plaintiff: John M. Searson; First Defendant: Dublin City Council; Second Defendant: Bobby Aylward; Third Defendant: Peter Burke; Fourth Defendant: Shane Cassells; Fifth Defendant: Catherine Connolly; Sixth Defendant: David Cullinane; Seventh Defendant: Pat Dearing; Eighth Defendant: Alan Farrell; Ninth Defendant: Sean Fleming; Tenth Defendant: Alan Kelly; Eleventh Defendant: Mark MacSharry; Twelfth Defendant: Catherine Murphy; Thirteenth Defendant: Jonathan O’Brien; Fourteenth Defendant: Kate O’Connell
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
21 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Plenary Summons / Application to Strike Out Claim
Outcome
plaintiff's action against the second to fourteenth defendants dismissed
Legal Topics
Strike Out Application, Frivolous and Vexatious Proceedings, Reasonable Cause of Action, Inherent Jurisdiction, Order 19 Rule 28
Civil Procedure Strike Out Application Frivolous and Vexatious Proceedings Reasonable Cause of Action Inherent Jurisdiction Order 19 Rule 28

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John M. Searson

Plaintiff

Dublin City Council

First Defendant

Bobby Aylward

Second Defendant

Peter Burke

Third Defendant

Shane Cassells

Fourth Defendant

Catherine Connolly

Fifth Defendant

David Cullinane

Sixth Defendant

Pat Dearing

Seventh Defendant

Alan Farrell

Eighth Defendant

Sean Fleming

Ninth Defendant

Alan Kelly

Tenth Defendant

Mark MacSharry

Eleventh Defendant

Catherine Murphy

Twelfth Defendant

Jonathan O’Brien

Thirteenth Defendant

Kate O’Connell

Fourteenth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Plenary Summons / Application to Strike Out Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff's claim against the second to fourteenth defendants discloses a reasonable cause of action
  2. 2 Whether the proceedings are frivolous and/or vexatious and bound to fail

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff's claim against the second to fourteenth defendants was bound to fail as they did not deal with his complaint, and there was no evidence or basis for alleging conspiracy or breach of rights. The proceedings were frivolous and vexatious and disclosed no reasonable cause of action.

Court Disposition

plaintiff's action against the second to fourteenth defendants dismissed

Orders

  • Plaintiff's claim against the second to fourteenth defendants struck out as frivolous, vexatious, and bound to fail.