Feeney v Groves & Ors (Approved) [2025] IEHC 633 (22 October 2025)

Feeney v Groves & Ors (Approved) [2025] IEHC 633 (22 October 2025)

The court held that the refusal of a full recount by the returning officer did not constitute a mistake or irregularity likely to have affected the result of the election under s.132(5) of the Electoral Act 1992. The returning officer acted within his discretion under Rule 14(2) of the 1947 Act, and no evidence was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] IEHC 633
Parties
Petitioner: Angela Feeney; Respondent: Martin Groves; Respondent: Niall Blaney; Respondent: Victor Boyhan; Respondent: Paraic Brady; Respondent: Maria Byrne; Respondent: Joanne Collins; Respondent: Teresa Costello; Respondent: Paul Daly; Respondent: Eileen Lynch; Respondent: P. J. Murphy; Respondent: Malcolm Noonan; Respondent: Sarah O'Reilly; Notice Party: Director of Public Prosecutions; Notice Party: Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage; Notice Party: Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
22 October 2025
Procedural Posture
Election Petition / Final Judgment
Outcome
petition dismissed
Legal Topics
Seanad Election Recounts, Transparency in Vote Counting, Interpretation of Electoral Acts, Judicial Review of Returning Officer Decisions
Election Law Administrative Law Seanad Election Recounts Transparency in Vote Counting Interpretation of Electoral Acts Judicial Review of Returning Officer Decisions

Source-derived case record

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Angela Feeney

Petitioner

Martin Groves

Respondent

Niall Blaney

Respondent

Victor Boyhan

Respondent

Paraic Brady

Respondent

Maria Byrne

Respondent

Joanne Collins

Respondent

Teresa Costello

Respondent

Paul Daly

Respondent

Eileen Lynch

Respondent

P. J. Murphy

Respondent

Malcolm Noonan

Respondent

Sarah O'Reilly

Respondent

Director of Public Prosecutions

Notice Party

Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage

Notice Party

Attorney General

Notice Party

Procedural Posture

Election Petition / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the refusal of a full recount by the returning officer constituted a mistake or irregularity likely to have affected the result under s.132(5) of the Electoral Act 1992
  2. 2 Whether the alleged lack of transparency in the counting process breached statutory requirements and affected the election result
  3. 3 Proper interpretation of Rule 14(2) of the Second Schedule to the Seanad Electoral (Panel Members) Act 1947

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the refusal of a full recount by the returning officer did not constitute a mistake or irregularity likely to have affected the result of the election under s.132(5) of the Electoral Act 1992. The returning officer acted within his discretion under Rule 14(2) of the 1947 Act, and no evidence was presented of any error or irregularity in the count. The court further found that while the transparency of the counting process could have been improved, the arrangements did not breach statutory requirements or undermine the integrity of the election. The petitioner's failure to raise the transparency ground in her written objection also precluded the court from granting...

Court Disposition

petition dismissed

Orders

  • Petition dismissed in full.
  • No order for a recount.