Cunningham v Police Service of Northern Ireland [2016] NIQB 25 (11 March 2016)

Order 78 Rule 1A should be interpreted as applying only to closed material procedure applications under the Justice and Security Act 2013 and does not preclude a County Court Judge from hearing and determining a public interest immunity application.

Citation: [2016] NIQB 25
Parties: Plaintiff/appellant: Ciaran Cunningham; Defendant/respondent: Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland
Jurisdiction: Northern Ireland
Judgment Date: 11 March 2016
Procedural Posture: Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court to High Court
Outcome: Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics: Public Interest Immunity, Closed Material Procedure, Jurisdiction of County Court, Interpretation of Court Rules

Civil Procedure National Security Law Public Interest Immunity Closed Material Procedure Jurisdiction of County Court Interpretation of Court Rules

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 2 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2

Parties

Ciaran Cunningham

Plaintiff/appellant

Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court to High Court

Legal Issues

1 Does Order 78 Rule 1A of the Rules of the Court of Judicature preclude a County Court Judge from determining a public interest immunity (PII) application?
2 Should Order 78 Rule 1A be interpreted to apply only to closed material procedure applications under the Justice and Security Act 2013?

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed