D -v- District Judge Haughton & Anor [2011] IEHC 42 (8th day of February, 2011)

D -v- District Judge Haughton & Anor [2011] IEHC 42 (8th day of February, 2011)

The applicant lacked locus standi as he had no legal right or interest to vindicate; the District Court order was valid on its face and the placement was within the HSE's statutory powers. Judicial review was not appropriate as the applicant was not entitled to be present at the hearing and the District Judge had...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2011] IEHC 42
Parties
Applicant: RD; Respondent: District Judge Haughton; Respondent: The Health Service Executive
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / High Court Judgment
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Care Orders, Foster Care, Locus Standi, Judicial Review Scope
Child Law Judicial Review Care Orders Foster Care Locus Standi Judicial Review Scope

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

RD

Applicant

District Judge Haughton

Respondent

The Health Service Executive

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant has locus standi to challenge the District Court care order and the placement of the child
  2. 2 Whether the District Court care order and subsequent placement were lawful and open to judicial review

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant lacked locus standi as he had no legal right or interest to vindicate; the District Court order was valid on its face and the placement was within the HSE's statutory powers. Judicial review was not appropriate as the applicant was not entitled to be present at the hearing and the District Judge had full knowledge of the facts.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • No order for costs