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]
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.
Crotty v An Taoiseach [1] was a landmark 1987 decision of the Irish Supreme Court which found that Ireland could not ratify the Single European Act unless the Irish Constitution was first changed to permit its ratification.
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 ...
The Supreme Court ultimately found that the Regulation of Information (Services outside the State for the Termination of Pregnancies) Act 1995 was constitutional, and decisively rejected the argument that natural law supersede positive law in the Constitution of Ireland.
High Court: Appealed to: Supreme Court: Case opinions; The Supreme Court considered whether a contract is automatically unenforceable if it is illegal. 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 ...
The Supreme Court held that the requirements of section 21A of the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003 (the 2003 Act) had not been satisfied. Meaning, there had been no decision made to prosecute Bailey for the alleged murder of du Plantier by French authorities. Without such a decision, it would be unlawful to extradite him to France.