M v T (Approved) [2025] IEHC 623 (28 October 2025)

M v T (Approved) [2025] IEHC 623 (28 October 2025)

The plaintiff has not established that the inspection sought is relevant, necessary, or expedient at this pre-pleading stage, as the nature of the claim and the issues between the parties have not yet crystallised. Preservation of evidence is sufficient to protect the plaintiff's rights until pleadings are exchanged, at which point inspection may be reconsidered.

Citation
[2025] IEHC 623
Parties
Applicant: M; Respondent: T
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
28 October 2025
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application (pre Action) / Application for Preservation and Inspection Orders Prior to Commencement of Proceedings
Outcome
application for inspection adjourned as premature; preservation order granted; reporting restrictions imposed
Legal Topics
Pre Action Discovery, Evidence Preservation, Inspection of Property, Reporting Restrictions, Negligence, Duty of Care
Civil Procedure Personal Injuries Child Law Pre Action Discovery Evidence Preservation Inspection of Property Reporting Restrictions Negligence +1 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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M

Applicant

T

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application (pre Action) / Application for Preservation and Inspection Orders Prior to Commencement of Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff is entitled to pre-action inspection of property and documents under Order 50 Rule 4 RSC and section 12 of the Personal Injuries Assessment Board Act 2003
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff has established the necessity and relevance of the inspection sought prior to pleadings being closed
  3. 3 Whether reporting restrictions should be imposed to protect the plaintiff's anonymity

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff has not established that the inspection sought is relevant, necessary, or expedient at this pre-pleading stage, as the nature of the claim and the issues between the parties have not yet crystallised. Preservation of evidence is sufficient to protect the plaintiff's rights until pleadings are exchanged, at which point inspection may be reconsidered.

Court Disposition

application for inspection adjourned as premature; preservation order granted; reporting restrictions imposed

Orders

  • Order for preservation of the garden shed, CCTV footage, and accident/incident records granted
  • Order for inspection of evidence adjourned with liberty to re-enter after pleadings are closed