Grace v Hendrick & Anor (Approved) [2021] IEHC 320 (11 May 2021)

Grace v Hendrick & Anor (Approved) [2021] IEHC 320 (11 May 2021)

The court held that O.15 r.9 RSC does not empower it to direct an unwilling defendant to act as a representative defendant. However, the court has inherent jurisdiction to order disclosure of the names and addresses of members of an unincorporated association (here, the Christian Brothers) for the purpose of joining them as defendants, even absent prima facie evidence of wrongdoing, where the defendant is a concurrent wrongdoer and the interests of justice require it. The plaintiff had no other means to obtain the information, and without it would be prejudiced in prosecuting his claim and potentially in recovering any judgment. The refusal of the second named defendant to provide the...

Citation
[2021] IEHC 320
Parties
Plaintiff: Kenneth Grace; First Named Defendant: Paul Hendrick; Second Named Defendant: Edmund Garvey
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
11 May 2021
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury / Tort (sexual Assault, Vicarious Liability) / Interlocutory Motion for Disclosure of Names and Addresses of Potential Defendants
Outcome
Plaintiff's motion for disclosure of names and addresses of members of the Congregation of Christian Brothers during the relevant period granted under the court's inherent jurisdiction; motion for representative defendant under O.15 r.9 RSC refused.
Legal Topics
Representative Actions, Inherent Jurisdiction, Norwich Pharmacal Orders, Disclosure of Identity of Wrongdoers, Vicarious Liability of Unincorporated Associations, Class Actions, Discovery Against Concurrent Wrongdoers

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 31 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kenneth Grace

Plaintiff

Paul Hendrick

First Named Defendant

Edmund Garvey

Second Named Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury / Tort (sexual Assault, Vicarious Liability) / Interlocutory Motion for Disclosure of Names and Addresses of Potential Defendants

  1. 1 Whether the court can order a defendant to act as a representative defendant under O.15 r.9 RSC without consent
  2. 2 Whether the court can order disclosure of names and addresses of members of an unincorporated association (Christian Brothers) for the purpose of joining them as defendants
  3. 3 Whether the inherent jurisdiction of the court permits such disclosure absent prima facie evidence of wrongdoing

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that O.15 r.9 RSC does not empower it to direct an unwilling defendant to act as a representative defendant. However, the court has inherent jurisdiction to order disclosure of the names and addresses of members of an unincorporated association (here, the Christian Brothers) for the purpose of joining them as defendants, even absent prima facie evidence of wrongdoing, where the defendant is a concurrent wrongdoer and the interests of justice require it. The plaintiff had no other means to obtain the information, and without it would be prejudiced in prosecuting his claim and potentially in recovering any judgment. The refusal of the second named defendant to provide the...

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's motion for disclosure of names and addresses of members of the Congregation of Christian Brothers during the relevant period granted under the court's inherent jurisdiction; motion for representative defendant under O.15 r.9 RSC refused.

Orders

  • Order refusing to direct or authorise the second named defendant to act as representative defendant under O.15 r.9 RSC.
  • Order directing the second named defendant to disclose the full names and addresses of persons who were members of the Congregation of Christian Brothers in Ireland during the period from 1 August 1979 to 31 December 1984 and who are currently members.