O'Neill -v- McCann Fitzgerald Solicitors and ors [2017] IESC 8 (13 February 2017)

O'Neill -v- McCann Fitzgerald Solicitors and ors [2017] IESC 8 (13 February 2017)

The Supreme Court found no error in the High Court’s application of the principles for striking out proceedings, holding that the plaintiff’s claims against the first named defendant disclosed no reasonable cause of action, were unsustainable, and amounted to an abuse of process.

Citation
[2017] IESC 8
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Edward O’Neill; 1st Defendant/respondent: McCann Fitzgerald Solicitors; 2nd Defendant: Brian Lynch & Associates Solicitors; 3rd Defendant: Orla Cullinan Solicitors T/A O. M. Cullinan & Co. Solicitors; 4th Defendant: Timothy Doyle
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
13 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court Order Striking Out Claim
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Strike Out Application, Abuse of Process, Reasonable Cause of Action, Solicitor's Duties, Frivolous and Vexatious Proceedings
Civil Procedure Legal Profession Strike Out Application Abuse of Process Reasonable Cause of Action Solicitor's Duties Frivolous and Vexatious Proceedings

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Edward O’Neill

Plaintiff/appellant

McCann Fitzgerald Solicitors

1st Defendant/respondent

Brian Lynch & Associates Solicitors

2nd Defendant

Orla Cullinan Solicitors T/A O. M. Cullinan & Co. Solicitors

3rd Defendant

Timothy Doyle

4th Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From High Court Order Striking Out Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court erred in striking out the plaintiff’s claim against the first named defendant for disclosing no reasonable cause of action, being frivolous, vexatious, or an abuse of process.

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court found no error in the High Court’s application of the principles for striking out proceedings, holding that the plaintiff’s claims against the first named defendant disclosed no reasonable cause of action, were unsustainable, and amounted to an abuse of process.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.