DOCSLIB.ORG

JUSTICE MATTERS Independence, Accountability and the Irish Judiciary TANYA WARD

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
JUSTICE MATTERS Independence, Accountability and the Irish Judiciary TANYA WARD JUSTICE MATTERS Independence, Accountability and the Irish Judiciary TANYA WARD 22473_ICCL_Judiciary_cover_sectio1473_ICCL_Judiciary_cover_sectio1 1 111/07/20071/07/2007 111:26:561:26:56 Th e Irish Council for Civil Liberties (ICCL) is Ireland’s leading independent human rights watchdog, which monitors, educates and campaigns in order to secure full enjoyment of human rights for everyone. ABOUT THE AUTHOR: TANYA WARD is Senior Research and Policy Offi cer with the Irish Council for Civil Liberties. 22473_ICCL_Judiciary_cover_sectio2473_ICCL_Judiciary_cover_sectio2 2 111/07/20071/07/2007 111:26:581:26:58 CONTENTS ABOUT THE ICCL 5 SECTION 4 Personal Independence and the Irish Judiciary 45 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 7 4.1 Introduction 46 4.2 Appointments 46 4.2.1 Selection and Criteria 46 SECTION 1 Introduction 9 4.2.2 Th e Judicial Advisory Appointments Board 1.1. Introduction 10 (JAAB) 50 1.2. Aims and Objectives of Study 12 4.3 Conditions of Service and Tenure 54 1.3. Methodology 13 4.4 Adequate Remuneration 56 1.4. Report Outline 14 4.5 Freedom of Expression and Association 57 4.5.1 Representation and Association 57 4.5.2 Extra-Judicial Comment and Educating SECTION 2 International Human Rights the Public 58 Standards on Judicial Independence and 4.6 Competence, Diligence and Judicial Studies 60 Impartiality 15 4.6.1 Judicial Studies in Ireland 60 2.1 Introduction 16 4.6.2 Induction 62 2.2 What is Judicial Independence? 16 4.6.3 Human Rights Education 63 2.3 What is Judicial Impartiality? 18 4.6.4 Further Academic Studies 65 2.4 International Human Rights Law Standards on 4.7 Judicial Accountability 65 Judicial Independence 19 4.7.1 Constitutional and Statutory Provisions 66 2.4.1 UN Instruments 19 4.7.2 Th e ‘Sheedy Aff air’ 67 2.4.2 European Convention on Human Rights 20 4.7.3 Proposals for Reform 68 2.5 Sources of International Non-Legal Principles on 4.7.4 Th e Curtin Case: Th e Impeachment Judicial Independence 23 Process Considered 69 4.7.5 Th e Committee on Judicial Conduct and Ethics (2000): Perspectives of Judges 71 SECTION 3 Functional Independence and 4.8 Recommendations 72 the Irish Judiciary 25 3.1 Introduction 26 3.2 Separation of Powers and Judicial Review 26 SECTION 5 Impartiality and the 3.2.1 Judicial Power 28 Irish Judiciary 75 3.3 Independence in Decision-Making 32 5.1 Introduction 76 3.3.1 Are Judges Subject to any External Pressure 5.2 Impartiality and Irish Law 76 when Adjudicating? 33 5.3 Disqualifi cation 78 3.3.2 Do Government Ministers Make Statements 5.4 Personal Bias and the Irish Judiciary 80 Adversely Aff ecting the Independence of Judges? 35 5.5 Corporate Bias and the Irish Judiciary 82 3.3.3 Are Judicial Decisions Subject to Revision? 37 5.6 Managing Fair Court Proceedings 85 3.4 Jurisdictional Competence 37 5.7 Recommendations 88 3.4.1 Jurisdictional Competence in the Irish Courts 37 3.4 2 Jurisdiction of the High Court 38 3.4.3 Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court 39 SECTION 6 Administrative Independence 89 3.5 Th e Right and Duty to Ensure Fair Court 6.1 Introduction 90 Proceedings and Deliver Reasoned Decisions 40 6.2 Adequate Resourcing 90 3.5.1 Failure to Provide Reasoned Decisions in the 6.3 Administration of the Courts 94 District Court 42 6.4 Allocation of Cases to Judges 96 3.6 Recommendations 43 6.5 Recommendations 96 SECTION 7 Summary of Recommendations 97 22473_ICCL_Judiciary_cover_sectio3473_ICCL_Judiciary_cover_sectio3 3 111/07/20071/07/2007 111:26:591:26:59 CONTENTS (continued) APPENDICES 102 LIST OF FIGURES Appendix 1: UN Basic Principles on the Figure 1: Structure and Jurisdiction of the Courts 8 Independence of the Judiciary (1985) 102 Appendix 2: Th e Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct 104 LIST OF TABLES Appendix 3: Interviews 112 Table 1: Number of Judges Elevated by Appendix 4: List of Interviews with Members Government 2002-2005 52 of the Irish Judiciary 113 Table 2: Received Salary from 1 December 2006 56 Appendix 5: Judiciary Advisory Group Members 114 Table 3: Funding for the Courts Service, 2002-2006 91 Table 4: Th e Workload of the Courts in 2005 92 LIST OF BOXES Box 1: What is the Function of a Judge? 12 Box 2: UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers 23 Box 3: What is Judicial Review? 26 Box 4: Th e case of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal (RAT) 29 Box 5: Judicial Declaration 33 Box 6: Standing Order 57: Debate matters sub judice 35 Box 7: Jurisdiction of the High Court 38 Box 8: Criteria for Judicial Appointments in New Zealand 50 Box 9: Criteria for Judicial Appointments in Canada 51 Box 10: Increasing Diversity in the Judiciary – England and Wales 84 Box 11: Extract from Law Reform Commission Report on Family Courts – A System in Crisis 90 Box 12: Working Group on a Courts Commission (1996) Observations on Court Administration 94 22473_ICCL_Judiciary_cover_sectio4473_ICCL_Judiciary_cover_sectio4 4 111/07/20071/07/2007 111:27:011:27:01 About the ICCL Th e Irish Council for Civil Liberties (ICCL) is Ireland’s leading independent human rights watchdog, which monitors, educates and campaigns in order to secure full enjoyment of human rights for everyone. We believe in a society which protects and promotes Th e priorities under each area: human rights, justice and equality. MONITORING HUMAN RIGHTS Th e ICCL campaigns to strengthen: • the implementation of international human rights obligations in Irish law; • the practice of rights through participative democracy; • individual autonomy from disproportionate interference by the state. PROMOTING JUSTICE Th e ICCL campaigns for: ICCL - Irish Council for Civil Liberties, 9-13 Blackhall Place, Dublin 7 • eff ective, accountability structures for the Gardaí that have the trust of the public, and eff ective, proportionate police powers; WHAT WE DO • eff ective penal policy not focused on incarceration, particularly in the area of youth justice; Th e ICCL campaigns in three key areas: Monitoring Human • independence and accountability for the judiciary, Rights, Promoting Justice and Securing Equality, through: specifi cally in the area of equality, racism and human rights. • Advocating positive changes in the area of human rights; • Monitoring government policy and legislation to make sure that it complies with international standards; SECURING EQUALITY • Conducting original research and publishing reports on issues as diverse as equality for all families, Th e ICCL campaigns to secure: Garda reform and judicial accountability; • equality proofi ng of law and policy; • Running campaigns to raise public and political • eff ective advocacy for marginalised communities; awareness of human rights, justice and equality issues; • recognition for all of equal rights in personal and • Working closely with other key stakeholders in the family relationships. human rights, justice and equality sectors. ICCL Justice Matters 2007 5 22473_ICCL_Judiciary_cover_sectio5473_ICCL_Judiciary_cover_sectio5 5 111/07/20071/07/2007 111:27:021:27:02 About the ICCL (continued) Founded in 1976 by, among others Mary Robinson, former President of Ireland and UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and Professor Kader Asmal, an anti-apartheid campaigner and former South African Government Minister, the ICCL has always adopted a rights-based approach to its work. From its early campaigns for Garda reform, through its PROMOTING JUSTICE advocacy of equal rights, to its ongoing eff orts to ensure the full implementation in Ireland of international human rights • Contributing to the Garda Human Rights Audit; standards, the ICCL has tirelessly lobbied the State to respect • Establishment and membership of the the inherent dignity of the individual. Garda Strategic Human Rights Advisory Committee; • Establishment of an independent Garda Ombudsman ICCL has played a leading role in some of the most successful Commission (2007); developments in human rights in Ireland, these include: • Producing a guide to the ECHR for all serving Garda members (2006). MONITORING HUMAN RIGHTS SECURING EQUALITY • Ireland incorporating the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) with the ECHR Act 2003; • Introduction of multi ground equality legislation; • Establishment of the Irish Human Rights • Removal of the Constitutional ban on divorce (1995); Commission (2000); • Promoting equality for gay women and men which • Th e Freedom of Information Act, 1997; contributed to decriminalising homosexuality (1993); • Promoting human rights elements of the • Placing issues including mental health, refugee rights Good Friday (Belfast) Agreement, 1998. and immigration on the political agenda. 6 ICCL Justice Matters 2007 22473_ICCL_Judiciary_cover_sectio6473_ICCL_Judiciary_cover_sectio6 6 111/07/20071/07/2007 111:27:021:27:02 Acknowledgements Th is project could not have been undertaken without the Th e ICCL would like to thank all those who agreed to support and assistance of the Courts Service and the ICCL participate on the Advisory Group for this project and would like to extend its gratitude to its staff , and in particular, for their input and feedback on the report. Th ey include: to: Mr Brendan Ryan, Director of Corporate Services; the Honourable Mr Justice Donal Barrington, Ms Noeline Ms Elisha Darcy and Ms Catriona Gilheaney. Th e ICCL Blackwell, Director of FLAC (Free Legal Advice Centres); would also like to thank all those who met with the researcher Sergeant Mick Byrne, An Garda Síochána; Ms Alma and agreed to be interviewed, including sitting and retired Clissmann, Parliamentary and Legal Reform Offi cer, members of the Irish judiciary. Law Society of Ireland; Ms Fiona Crowley, Legal and Research Manager, Amnesty International (Irish Section); Mr Michael Various individuals provided information and guidance Finucane, Solicitor; Ms Mary Ellen Ring, Senior Counsel; to the researcher which the ICCL wishes to acknowledge. Ms Judy Walsh, Law Lecturer, and in particular, Ms Aileen Th ey include: Mr Michael Farrell, Solicitor; Mr Michael Donnelly, Senior Counsel, who convened and chaired Finucane, Solicitor; Mr Michael Lynn, Barrister at Law the group.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Classified List of Acts in Force in Ireland Updated to 17 September 2021
    Classified List of Acts in Force in Ireland Updated to 17 September 2021 28. Oireachtas (National Parliament) and Legislation 28.1. Houses of the Oireachtas Service Public Exp1 Houses of the Oireachtas Commission Act 2003 28/2003 • Oireachtas (Ministerial and Parliamentary Offices) (Secretarial Facilities) (Banking Inquiry) Regulations 2014, S.I. No. 564 of 2014 • Oireachtas (Ministerial and Parliamentary Offices) (Secretarial Facilities) (Amendment) Regulations 2015, S.I. No. 164 of 2015 Finance Houses of the Oireachtas Commission (Amendment) Act 2006 39/2006 Finance Houses of the Oireachtas Commission (Amendment) Act 2009 44/2009 Finance Houses of the Oireachtas Commission (Amendment) (No. 2) Act 2012 50/2012 Finance Houses of the Oireachtas Commission (Amendment) Act 2013 3/2013 • Houses of the Oireachtas Commission (Amendment) Act 2013 (Commencement) Order 2013, S.I. No. 198 of 2013 Finance Houses of the Oireachtas (Appointments to Certain Offices) Act 2015 34/2015 Finance Houses of the Oireachtas Commission (Amendment) Act 2015 53/2015 Public Exp Houses of the Oireachtas Commission (Amendment) Act 2018 41/2018 28.2. Committees of the Oireachtas 28.2.1. Witnesses Public Exp Houses of the Oireachtas (Inquiries, Privileges and Procedures) Act 2013 2 33/2013 • Houses of the Oireachtas (Inquiries, Privileges and Procedures) Act 2013 (Commencement) Order 2013, S.I. No. 362 of 2013 Public Exp Comptroller and Auditor General and Committees of the Houses of the 47/1998 Oireachtas (Special Provisions) Act 1998 28.3. Legislation and Law Reform 28.3.1. Adaptation of Pre-1922 Charters Taoiseach Adaptation of Charters Act 1926 6/1926 • Saint Patrick’s Hospital, Dublin (Adaptation of Charters) Order 1926 [Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • Contempt and Public Interest
    Contempt and Public Interest as an incidental but not intended Robin Bowiey, in this paper which received by-product, cause some likelihood an honourable mention in the 2005 CAM LA of prejudice to a person who hap­ pens at the time to be a litigant ...It Assay Prize, advocates dearer rules regarding is well settled that a person cannot be prevented by process of contempt sub judice contempt. from continuing to discuss publicly a matter which may fairly be regarded Introduction "The conflict between freedom of as one of public interest, by reason speech and the proper administra­ of the fact that the matter in ques­ The law of sub judice contempt strivesto tion of justice is most likely to arise tion has become the subject of litiga­ balance the right to freedom of speech when a media organisation pub­ tion."8 ' . and discussion of matters of public inter­ lishes material which may interfere Walker explains that until the High Court's est with the right for persons facing legal with the course of particular legal decision in Hinch, there was considerable proceedings to have a fair trial, unpreju­ proceedings. Typically, those respon­ uncertainty regarding the practical appli­ diced by media comment. Striking a sible will not intend to prejudice the cation of the Breadmakers principle, with balance between these two interests is proceedings. They may have been some courts viewing the principle as an a difficult task, which in Australia, has motivated solely by a desire to bring inflexible rule.9 In Hinch it was held that been addressed by the common law over to the attention of the public mat­ courts must engage in a "balancing exer­ time.
    [Show full text]
  • Remote Court Hearings
    Oireachtas Library & Research Service | Bill Digest L&RS Note Remote Court Hearings Rebecca Halpin, Parliamentary Researcher, Law Abstract<xx> July 2020 28 July 2020 This L&RS Note considers the use of remote hearings in Ireland during the Covid-19 pandemic. The paper describes the way in which remote hearings have been introduced in Ireland and the type of matters in which they are used. The paper then considers the difficulties associated with remote hearings, the need for legislative reform, and circumstances in which remote hearings may be unsuitable. The L&RS gratefully acknowledges the assistance of Dr Rónán Kennedy, School of Law, NUI Galway in reviewing the contents of this Note in advance of publication. Oireachtas Library & Research Service | L&RS Note Contents Summary ........................................................................................................................................ 1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 2 Remote hearings – an overview ...................................................................................................... 3 ICT in Irish courts – capability and capacity .................................................................................... 4 Recent developments that facilitated the introduction of remote hearings .................................. 5 Impact and response to Covid-19 pandemic ..................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 1 an Taoiseach Enda Kenny TD Department of an Taoiseach
    An Taoiseach Enda Kenny TD Department of an Taoiseach Government Buildings Merrion Street Dublin 2 4 November 2014 RE: Law Enforcement Access to Data in the Irish Cloud Dear Taoiseach, As you know, the American Chamber of Commerce Ireland has close working relationships with the global American Chamber network. This network represents the interests of American multi-national companies across the world. The American Chamber of Commerce Ireland is one of the largest chambers in Europe as a result of the large base of American companies located in Ireland. These companies provide benefits, and economic growth in Europe, and several are technology companies that offer cloud-computing technology to European customers. Europeans can derive many benefits from widespread adoption of cloud computing technology. However, many Europeans may be hesitant to embrace cloud services because of lack of clarity about how their data is stored in remote data centres, many of which are located in Ireland. As a result of a number of matters that have been widely reported, such as the Snowden disclosures, European citizens have become more sensitive to ensuring respect for their right to privacy, including controls over how and to what extent data relating to them might be accessed by law enforcement authorities. The multijurisdictional dimension of cloud computing presents a number of legal challenges in this regard. This letter addresses one of the specific concerns - the extraterritorial reach of law enforcement authorities to access data in the context of routine criminal investigations. We believe that this concern can be effectively addressed by the Irish and US governments, to enhance the public’s trust while also increasing the effectiveness of law enforcement.
    [Show full text]
  • Challenges to the Sub Judice Rule in South Africa
    Page 1 of 9 Original Research Challenges to the sub judice rule in South Africa Author: As a lawyer, it is a privilege to contribute to this Festschrift in honour of Professor Doctor Johan Kobus van Rooyen1, 2 Buitendag. His entire career has been a quest for the truth. In the process, he has fearlessly rejected political agendas based on the Bible, and has inspired countless students in their Affiliations: 1Faculty of Law, University of quest to serve God in a practical and humane manner. His published research as well as the Pretoria, South Africa output of his doctoral students, both present and past, bear witness to a life dedicated to the search for knowledge in the service of God. He has also assisted substantially in placing South 2Faculty of Theology, African theological research on the international map. In a sense, this article which deals with University of Pretoria, South Africa the protection of the right to a fair trial of an accused, also acknowledges Johan Buitendag’s quest for justice for all South Africans, whatever their creed, gender, race or standing. The Note: subject of my article demonstrates my own quest to promote the constitutional right of an Chair, Broadcasting accused to a fair trial, a right that should not be subject to inordinate pressure by the media, Complaints Commission of South Africa (1993−); and which gives priority to the right of an accused to be presumed innocent: an accused who Emeritus Professor of Law, may frequently suffer loneliness and a sense of rejection. Related to that it is, of course, always University of Pretoria; important to bear in mind that freedom of expression is at the heart of our democracy.
    [Show full text]
  • Pro Bono Practices and Opportunities in the Republic of Ireland
    Pro Bono Practices and Opportunities in the Republic of Ireland INTRODUCTION The practice of pro bono is continuing to grow and develop in the Republic of Ireland (“Ireland”) and there are high levels of enthusiasm for pro bono opportunities among the legal profession. Nevertheless, there remains room for expansion in the provision of pro bono services, with Ireland arguably lagging behind several other comparable common law countries. OVERVIEW OF THE LEGAL SYSTEM Constitution and Governing Laws Ireland has a parliamentary democracy, with the President of Ireland elected directly by the people as its head of state,1 and is a common law jurisdiction, derived from the English legal system. Irish courts are bound by precedent.2 As a member of the European Union (the “EU”), Ireland’s legal system is also influenced significantly by EU law, with certain provisions having “direct effect” and thus being directly enforceable in Irish courts.3 The Courts Ireland has a tiered court structure with the Supreme Court at the top, serving as the court of final appeal in civil and criminal matters. Beneath the Supreme Court is the Court of Appeal,4 and then the High Court, Circuit Court (with appeals going to the High Court) and, at the bottom of the structure, the District Court. The courts have jurisdiction over all civil and criminal matters with the District Court dealing with the most minor civil and criminal cases.5 Some specialist matters, such as employment and social welfare cases, are dealt with by tribunals, which are similar to courts but aim to be less expensive and formal.6 Judges for all courts are appointed by the President of Ireland upon the recommendation of the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board (the “Board”).7 Persons seeking to be appointed as judges must apply to the Board, with the Board then making submissions to the Minister for Justice who, in turn, advises the 1 See http://www.president.ie/en/the-president/constitutional-role (last visited on September 4, 2015).
    [Show full text]
  • Upholding the Integrity of Our Justice System and Balancing Rights
    UPHOLDING THE INTEGRITY OF OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM AND BALANCING RIGHTS A note from Indranee Rajah S.C., Senior Minister of State for Law The Administration of Justice (Protection) Act was enacted by Parliament on 15 August 2016. • The Act can be found at statutes.agc.gov.sg. • The Minister for Law’s Second Reading (2R) speech can be found at www.mlaw.gov.sg. With the Act, the law of contempt of court is now written into statute. Contempt of court has always existed at common law in Singapore. However it was the only non-statute based criminal law, an observation by former Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong, which prompted the review that led to the Act that has just been passed. Under the common law, there were also no upper limits on the punishment that could be meted out. The Act: • maintains the existing law of contempt, save for one change; • introduces a new procedural mechanism to deal with contemptuous publications in the social media age; and • imposes limits on the maximum punishment. Putting contempt law into statutory form makes it clearer and defines its boundaries. This is important given the penal consequences for contempt. PURPOSE AND INTENT Singapore adheres strongly to the rule of law. The laws against contempt of court ensure fair and effective justice, and protect the integrity of our legal institutions. They balance free speech with an individual’s right to a fair trial and ensure that court orders are complied with. All these are critical to maintaining societal order. The law of contempt falls into four broad categories:- • Scandalising the Court – this prevents baseless attacks against our judges.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER—26 General Rules of Procedure
    CHAPTER—26 General Rules of Procedure Notices General procedure very matter proposed to be raised in the House by a member, whether E is in the form of a question, resolution, motion, Bill, amendment, or otherwise, requires notice. Every notice, required by the rules has to be given in writing addressed to the Secretary-General and signed by the member giving notice and has to be delivered at the Notice Office between 10.00 a.m. and 4.00 p.m.1 every day except Saturday, Sunday or a public holiday.2 Notices left or received after 4.00 p.m. on any open day, or left on any day when the Notice Office is closed are treated as given on the next open day3 but subsequently modified for different classes of business as notified in Bulletin Part-II prior to the commencement of every session.4 Notices may be delivered by members personally or through messengers and can also be sent by post. The Rules Committee was of the view that the notices/communications received through Fax should be treated as authentic notices/ communications provided that they were signed and followed by written notices.5 At the stage of adoption of the report, the House, however, did not accept the Committee’s recommendation.6 For the convenience of members, in addition to the box kept outside the Notice Office, another box is kept at the Rajya Sabha Reception Counter in the main Reception Hall of the Parliament House, for enabling the personal staff of members to deposit notices of questions, motions, resolutions, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • SCC File No. 37112 in the SUPREME COURT of CANADA
    S.C.C. File No. 37112 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA (ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL OF ONTARIO) BETWEEN: JOSEPH PETER PAUL GROIA APPELLANT (Appellant) -and- THE LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA RESPONDENT (Respondent) -and- DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SASKATCHEWAN, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF ONTARIO, LAW SOCIETY TRIBUNAL, ADVOCATES’ SOCIETY, BARREAU DU QUEBEC, CANADIAN CIVIL LIBERTIES ASSOCIATION, BRITISH COLUMBIA CIVIL LIBERTIES ASSOCIATION, INDEPENDENT CRIMINAL DEFENCE ADVOCACY SOCIETY, FEDERATION OF LAW SOCIETIES OF CANADA, ONTARIO CROWN ATTORNEYS’ ASSOCIATION, ONTARIO TRIAL LAWYERS ASSOCIATION, CANADIAN BAR ASSOCIATION, CRIMINAL LAWYERS’ ASSOCIATION OF ONTARIO INTERVENERS FACTUM OF THE INTERVENER, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SASKATCHEWAN (Pursuant to Rule 42 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Canada) MINISTRY OF JUSTICE AND GOWLING WLG (CANADA) LLP ATTORNEY GENERAL 160 Elgin Street GOVERNMENT OF SASKATCHEWAN Suite 2600 820 – 1874 Scarth Street OTTAWA ON K1P 1C3 REGINA SK S4P 4B3 D. Lynne Watt Sharon H. Pratchler, Q.C. Tel: (613) 786-0171 Tel: (306) 787-5584 Fax: (613) 788-3587 Fax: (306) 787-9111 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Ottawa agent to Counsel for the Intervener Counsel for the Intervenor, Attorney General Attorney General of Saskatchewan of Saskatchewan - i - LERNERS LLP GOWLING WLG (CANADA) LLP 130 Adelaide Street West 160 Elgin Street Suite 2400 Suite 2600 TORONTO ON M5H 3P5 OTTAWA ON K1P 1C3 Earl A. Cherniak, Q.C. (9113C) Jeffrey W. Beedell Tel: (416) 601-2350 Tel: (613) 786-0171 Fax: (416) 867-2402 Fax: (613) 788-3587 Email: [email protected] Email: jeff.beedell @gowlingwlg.com Counsel for the Appellant, Joseph Peter Paul Ottawa Agent to Counsel for the Appellant, Groia Joseph Peter Paul Groia LENCZNER SLAGHT ROYCE SMITH DENTONS CANADA LLP GRIFFIN LLP 99 Bank Street, Suite 1420 Suite 2600 OTTAWA ON K1P 1H4 130 Adelaide Street West TORONTO ON M5H 3P5 David R.
    [Show full text]
  • Courts Service Ireland
    Response questionnaire project group Timeliness Courts' Service Ireland 1 The Court System and Available Statistics 1.1 The Court System The Irish justice system consists primarily of four tiers of courts; the District Court, the Circuit Court, the High Court and the Supreme Court. The District Court is the lowest court, having jurisdiction over minor civil and criminal matters. The civil jurisdiction does not exceed €6,348.69. For criminal matters the Court only hears minor offences. It only hears criminal cases where the maximum custodial sentence permitted upon conviction is 12 months or up to 2 years where a consecutive sentence is imposed. The District Court also has some jurisdiction in the family law area. Proceedings in Family Law are not heard in open court and are as informal as is practicable. The District Court also has wide powers in relation to liquor and lottery licensing. The Circuit Court has jurisdiction in most criminal jury trials and civil matters with a jurisdiction not exceeding €38,092.14. It also hears appeals from the District Court. The Circuit and High Court have concurrent jurisdiction in the area of Family Law. The Circuit Court has jurisdiction in a wide range of family law proceedings, (judicial separation, divorce, nullity and appeals from the District Court). The High Court has full and original jurisdiction in all matters and is the constitutional Court of first instance. In terms of its criminal jurisdiction, it sits as the Central Criminal Court and has jurisdiction over the most serious criminal trials, including those relating to murder, rape and serious sexual offences.
    [Show full text]
  • Journal of Forensic & Investigative Accounting Vol. 6, Issue 3, Special
    Journal of Forensic & Investigative Accounting Vol. 6, Issue 3, Special International Issue, 2014 Forensic Accounting in a Constitutional Parliamentary Democracy: The Case of Ireland Niamh M. Brennan* This paper commences with a contextual overview of the economic geography of Ireland, followed in Section 2 by an overview of the Irish legal system. The paper concludes by examining the forensic accounting profession in Ireland. Sources used include Brennan et al. (1992) for the context material in Section 1 and some of the material on the accounting profession in Section 3; and Brennan and Hennessy (2001a) for the material on forensic accounting. The case law cited in the paper is entirely from the Irish courts. Many judgments of the United Kingdom courts and other common-law jurisdictions would have currency in the Irish courts. Brennan and Hennessy (2001a) is the seminal (and only) text on this subject in Ireland. It deals in-depth with all aspects of forensic accounting practice with extensive citation from judgments of the Irish (and other common-law) courts. The text is inter-disciplinary with both a strong accounting and legal focus. A number of shorter more accessible articles have being written by the authors, such as Brennan (2005) and Brennan and Hennessy (2001b, 2001c, 2001d, 2001e, 2001f). More recent articles on the subject include Hyland and McGloin (2008), Brown (2011), Fitzgerald (2011) and Idowu (2011). CONTEXT This short introductory context section summarizes the geography and population of Ireland and its political institutions. * Niamh M. Brennan is Michael MacCormac Professor of Management at University College Dublin, Ireland, and Academic Director of the UCD Centre for Corporate Governance.
    [Show full text]
  • District Court Child Care Proceedings
    District Court Child Care Proceedings: A National Overview By Dr Carol Coulter March 2019 The report is published by the: Child Care Law Reporting Project 7 Red Cow Lane, Smithfield, Dublin www.childlawproject.ie © 2019 Child Care Law Reporting Project The Child Care Law Reporting Project grants permission for the reproduction of quotations from this text, provided due acknowledgment of the source is made and provided such citations do not exceed 400 words in length. Funded by: Department of Children and Youth Affairs Acknowledgements The study would not have been possible without the ongoing financial support of the Department of Children and Youth Affairs. I would like to acknowledge the assistance of the staff of the Courts Service of Ireland and members of the judiciary who have always been helpful and encouraging to all the work of the Child Care Law Reporting Project (CCLRP). I am extremely grateful to them. I would also like to thank the CCLRP reporters who, along with myself, carried out the field research for this study: Lisa Colfer, Sarah-Jane Comerford, Beatrice Cronin, Joyce Marry and Anne Purcell. I am also very grateful to Maria Corbett for her inputs on the study’s design and her review of the final draft. Thanks also are owed to Yvonne Woods for her work on the editing, production and publicising of the report. Unless otherwise stated, all the observations in this report are from the CCLRP reporters. It goes without saying that any inadequacies in this report are my responsibility alone. Carol Coulter March 2019 Contents Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 1 District Court Venues ............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]