O'Callaghan v. Mahon & Ors [2005] IEHC 265 (29 July 2005)

O'Callaghan v. Mahon & Ors [2005] IEHC 265 (29 July 2005)

The applicant's constitutional right to defend his good name and to conduct a meaningful cross-examination requires disclosure of all material relevant to the credibility of the notice party, including material not directly relevant to the factual allegations in the current modules. Redactions justified solely on the basis of third-party privacy or tribunal administrative convenience are not permissible where they impede this right. Disclosure is to be restricted in use to the proceedings only.

Citation
[2005] IEHC 265
Parties
Applicant: Owen O'Callaghan; Respondents: Judge Alan Mahon, Judge Mary Faherty and Judge Gearald B Keys, Members of the Tribunal of Inquiry into Certain Planning Matters and Payments
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
29 July 2005
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Post Supreme Court Remittal, Application Regarding Compliance With Disclosure Order
Outcome
Application granted in part; redactions in categories D, E, F, G, H, I not permitted; disclosure ordered subject to use restrictions.
Legal Topics
Disclosure of Documents, Right to Fair Procedures, Natural and Constitutional Justice, Right to Good Name, Redaction of Documents, Cross Examination Rights
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Tribunal Procedure Disclosure of Documents Right to Fair Procedures Natural and Constitutional Justice Right to Good Name Redaction of Documents +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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Owen O'Callaghan

Applicant

Judge Alan Mahon, Judge Mary Faherty and Judge Gearald B Keys, Members of the Tribunal of Inquiry into Certain Planning Matters and Payments

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Post Supreme Court Remittal, Application Regarding Compliance With Disclosure Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondents' redactions from disclosed documents comply with the High Court and Supreme Court orders regarding fair procedures and the applicant's right to cross-examine.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant is entitled to access all material relevant to the credibility of the notice party, including material not directly relevant to the factual allegations under inquiry.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's constitutional right to defend his good name and to conduct a meaningful cross-examination requires disclosure of all material relevant to the credibility of the notice party, including material not directly relevant to the factual allegations in the current modules. Redactions justified solely on the basis of third-party privacy or tribunal administrative convenience are not permissible where they impede this right. Disclosure is to be restricted in use to the proceedings only.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part; redactions in categories D, E, F, G, H, I not permitted; disclosure ordered subject to use restrictions.

Orders

  • Redactions in categories A, B, C, J, K permitted.
  • Redactions in categories D, E, F, G, H, I not permitted; material to be disclosed to applicant's legal advisors.