Quinlivan v. Conroy [1998] IESC 31; [1999] 1 IR 271 (29th October, 1998)

Quinlivan v. Conroy [1998] IESC 31; [1999] 1 IR 271 (29th October, 1998)

The appeal was dismissed because the respondents did not have possession or power over the documents sought, and the appellant failed to establish the relevance of the documents to any live issue in the litigation. The legal right to obtain the documents was not established, nor were the British authorities joined as parties.

Citation
[1998] IESC 31
Parties
Appellant: Nessan Quinlivan; Respondents: Assistant Commissioners of the Garda Síochána
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal From High Court Refusal of Discovery
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Discovery, Extradition, Political Offence Exception, Agent Provocateur, Jurisdiction, Possession and Power of Documents

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nessan Quinlivan

Appellant

Assistant Commissioners of the Garda Síochána

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal From High Court Refusal of Discovery

  1. 1 Whether the respondents are in possession or power of the documents sought for discovery
  2. 2 Whether the documents sought are relevant to the issues in the extradition proceedings
  3. 3 Whether the appellant is entitled to discovery against the respondents in the context of extradition proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the respondents did not have possession or power over the documents sought, and the appellant failed to establish the relevance of the documents to any live issue in the litigation. The legal right to obtain the documents was not established, nor were the British authorities joined as parties.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; no order for discovery granted.