Constitutional Interpretation Flashcards
DPP v Shaw
The right to life was prioritized over the right to liberty.
O’Byrne v Minister for Finance
It revolved around whether **taxation **was considered a reduction in a judge’s pay, resulting in differing interpretations of the literal meaning of Article 35.5 (judge’s pay could not be reduced)
Paperlink
The court argued for a purposive approach to interpretation over a literal approach due to the involvement of personal rights
NUR v Sullivan
- ‘Mark it’s great outlines’
- The case highlighted that the text of a Constitution ought to outline its main principles, allowing broader interpretative approaches.
McGee v AG
The case criticized the historical approach, stating that the Constitution should be viewed as a living document rather than strictly based on historical context.
Ryan v AG
The case evaluated the claim that personal rights, like bodily integrity, could be derived from natural law, which was not explicitly stated in the Constitution.
Merriam & Others v Fingal County Council
The court recognized a constitutional right to environmental protection, linking it to human dignity and well-being.
Curtain v Dail Eireann
The court suggested using the literal approach for clear and unambiguous words, while other methods should apply in cases of ambiguity.
Roche v Roche
It involved ownership claims over frozen embryos, highlighting the need to consider the common understanding involved in the referendum’s protective intent for unborn babies.
IRM v Minister for Justice
The court used the purposive approach, concluding that the term ‘all children’ did not include unborn children per Article 40.3.3.
H v A
The constitution altered the definition of marriage to include two persons, recognizing same-sex marriage while excluding polygamous arrangements.
DPP v Walsh
The court sought to reconcile Article 38.5 (right to a jury trial) with Articles 34 & 35 (just by judge) , emphasizing that all constitutional articles should be interpreted in harmony
TD v Minister for Education
This case considered whether judges should derive personal rights from the prevailing Christian perspective in Ireland, questioning the applicability of natural law.
Henaghan
The case rejected modern arguments for constitutional interpretation based on a failed referendum, emphasizing original intent.
Melling v Mathghamhna
The court employed the historical approach to define ‘minor offence’ as per the Constitution’s original meaning.
Dillane v Ireland
The case discussed applying dimensions so that each constitutional provision is given due weight based on the circumstances.
Bacik v An Taoiseach,
a) The starting point is to **carefully consider the words used in a constitutional provision **
b) It may be necessary to consider the meaning of the words in the Irish language version
- Takes priority
c) Where words used are clear and unambiguous, they are to be construed in their literal sense
d) Words used in the provision must not be interpreted in isolation, but in the context of the Constitution as a whole
e) If a literal interpretation causes **conflict, the harmonious approach should be used **
f) In cases of doubt, ambiguity, inconsistency or silence, it is legitimate to have regard to factors such as the historical context*
