Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Supreme Court upheld the decisions of the lower courts and decided that the question of Judicial Review was not to be dealt with by the Supreme Court. DPP v McLoughlin [2009] IESC 65: The admissibility of hearsay evidence for bail applications Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform v Dolny [2009] IESC 48
The Supreme Court was formally established on 29 September 1961 under the terms of the 1937 Constitution of Ireland. [1] [2] Prior to 1961, a transitory provision of the 1937 Constitution permitted the Supreme Court of the Irish Free State to continue, though the justices were required to take the new oath of office prescribed by the 1937 Constitution. [3]
Gt v Kao [2007] IESC 55; [2008] 3 IR 567 [1] is an Irish Supreme Court case which upheld the High Court's decision that, under article 3 of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of Child Abduction, the appellant had acted unlawfully in taking her two children outside of Ireland without permission from the respondent (the children's biological father).
Costello v. Government of Ireland [2022] IESC 44 is a decision of the Supreme Court of Ireland in which it held that Irish law precludes the ratification of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, an agreement signed between Canada and the European Union on 30 October 2016. The case had been taken by Patrick Costello, a Green Party TD.
The Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal, and the High Court are provided for in the Constitution. The Supreme Court of Ireland is defined as the Court of Final Appeal, but usually hears appeals only on points of law. Its decisions as to the interpretation of the Constitution and the law are final.
The Supreme Court decided that the Appeal was correct and that the Quinns could not rely Section 60 of the Companies Act of 1963 to support their claims of a violation. Decision by: Mr. Justice Clarke: Keywords; Anglo Irish Bank Sean Quinn Companies Act Nationalisation Banking Supreme Court of Ireland Contract
In the case of Meadows v Minister for Justice, Equality, and Law Reform [2010] IESC 3; [2010] 2 IR 701; [2011] 2 ILRM 157, the Supreme Court of Ireland found that the proportionality test should be used when reviewing administrative actions that implicate fundamental rights protected by both the Irish Constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights.
The Supreme Court also countered the decision of Cooke J. that the family had gone "off the radar" for a while in order to avoid deportation. During this time, the family had continued to receive social welfare benefits having been registered with the Department of Social Protection and members of the family also held employment in Ireland. [ 3 ]