Shatter -v- Guerin [2016] IECA 318 (10 November 2016)

Shatter -v- Guerin [2016] IECA 318 (10 November 2016)

The Court held that the statements in the Guerin Report did amount to serious criticism of Mr. Shatter and were damaging to his good name. However, the terms of reference permitted Mr. Guerin to reach evaluative conclusions. The process was not a statutory inquiry but a preliminary, non-binding review commissioned by the Government, and the full panoply of fair procedures was not required in the circumstances. The matter was not justiciable as the report was not a final determination affecting legal rights, and the establishment of the Commission of Investigation provided an appropriate forum for vindication of the applicant’s rights. The proceedings were also found to be a collateral...

Citation
[2016] IECA 318
Parties
Applicant/appellant: Alan Shatter; Respondent: Sean Guerin
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
10 November 2016
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; relief refused
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Natural Justice, Fair Procedures, Ultra Vires, Good Name/reputation, Justiciability, Collateral Attack, Locus Standi
Administrative Law Constitutional Law Judicial Review Natural Justice Fair Procedures Ultra Vires Good Name/reputation Justiciability +2 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 5 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alan Shatter

Applicant/appellant

Sean Guerin

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the statements in the Guerin Report damaged Mr. Shatter’s good name and reputation
  2. 2 Whether the statements were ultra vires the respondent’s terms of reference
  3. 3 Whether the process was subject to fair procedures and natural justice

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the statements in the Guerin Report did amount to serious criticism of Mr. Shatter and were damaging to his good name. However, the terms of reference permitted Mr. Guerin to reach evaluative conclusions. The process was not a statutory inquiry but a preliminary, non-binding review commissioned by the Government, and the full panoply of fair procedures was not required in the circumstances. The matter was not justiciable as the report was not a final determination affecting legal rights, and the establishment of the Commission of Investigation provided an appropriate forum for vindication of the applicant’s rights. The proceedings were also found to be a collateral...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; relief refused

Orders

  • No order of certiorari or mandamus granted
  • No declaration of breach of fair procedures or ultra vires action