Irish Con Law Cases

Question 1

McGimpsey v An Taoiseach [1990] 1 IR 110 (SC)​

Answer 1

Case details: Two NI citizens challenging Anglo-Irish (Good Friday) agreement, saying it violated various articles of the Constitution
Ratio: The agreement does not violate Art 2 and 3 of the Constitution because it acknowledges the current situation of NI while allowing that a reunification may one day take place.

Question 2

Re Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2022

Answer 2

Ratio: “The entire structure of the Constitution presupposes the existence of a state and a legal system governed by the rule of law. Article 5 describes the State as a democracy, yet without the appropriate rule of law guarantees, the essential democratic character of the State could not be assured” (Irish Constitutional Identity - Democracy and the Rule of Law)

• also notes the importance of the balance of powers between the three branches of government

Question 3

Corcoran v Commissioner of An Garda Síochána [2023]

Answer 3

Case Details: Trying to get a journalist to reveal their confidential source
Ratio: “without a free press there is no democracy, and the protection of sources is integral to a free press” - democracy is more than voting (conditions for democracy)

Question 4

Re Electoral (Amendment) Bill, 1983

Answer 4

Ratio: The right to vote in Dáil elections, presidential elections and referendums
cannot validly be extended, by Act of Oireachtas, to persons who are not citizens of Ireland

Question 5

O’Meara v The Minister for Social Protection [2024]

Answer 5

Case details: Was it unconstitutional to deny a man who was not married to his partner claim a Widower’s Contributory Pension for the sole reason that the couple had not been married to each other?
Ratio: yes, on the basis of Article 40.1 (equality before the law)​, butt hat outcome could NOT also be reached by holding that “the Family” referred to in Article 41 included relationships not “founded on Marriage”​

Question 6

Gorry v Minister for Justice [2020]

Answer 6

Case details: Nigerian woman who married Irish man, who was subsequently deported after staying in the country illegally for some years, bringing action to have the deportation order rescinded.
Ratio: There is no prima facie constitutionally protected right to cohabit in the State for marital couples, one of whom is a non-Irish national.
Article 8 of the ECHR should not be applied in the consideration of issues arising under the Constitution, because while the Constitution and the ECHR together provide extensive overlapping protection for families and marriage, it is necessary to recognise the different contexts.

Question 7

Bacik v An Taoiseach [2020]

Answer 7

Case details: Whether elected Seanad can sit without Seanad members appointed by the Taoiseach
Ratio: Harmonious interpretation not embraced wholeheartedly, but to read it as subject to a threshold of ambiguity in each individual constitutional provision being considered (“sixty means sixty”)

Question 8

Heneghan v Minister for Housing, Planning & Local Government [2023]

Answer 8

Case details: Seanad election case - Plaintiff claimed that it was unconstitutional to have such a narrowly defined electorate for the 43 panel seats and to restrict the franchise for the 6 University seats to graduates of the NUI and University of Dublin. Ratio: Art 18.4.2º requires that graduates of at least one other higher education institution be given the right to elect Senators, as well as graduates of the NUI and TCD (or of either); Seanad Electoral (University Members) Act, 1937 ss 6, 7 are thus invalid
Interpretation of any provision of the Constitution must comply with the fundamental principles that “underpin” or “underlie” the whole Constitution
No provision can be said to have a “plain meaning” or to be unambiguous until the fundamental principles and purposes of the entire Constitution have been considered.

Question 9

Reynolds v AG [1973]

Answer 9

Case details: With lowering of voting age from 21 to 18, 18 year old was seeking to have voting registers changed more quickly.
Ratio: 18 year old lost.

Question 10

Quinn v Waterford Corp [1991]

Answer 10

Ratio: Uni (third level) students living away from home can be registered to vote twice - home address and their uni address.

Question 11

Draper v AG [1984]

Answer 11

Case details: Person with MS was unable to go and vote because of her disability. Wanted to be able to vote from home.
Ratio: The Constitution does not require the Irish government to make sure every single person can vote no matter what. (Mail in ballot seen as vulnerable to fraud at the time.)

Question 12

Breathnach v Ireland [2001]

Answer 12

Case details: Convict serving time wanted to be able to vote.
Ratio: Draper v AG affirmed -State not obliged to ensure that every voter has an opportunity to exercise right to vote

Question 13

Redmond v Minister for Environment [2001]

Answer 13

Case details: Citizen suing to change the 300 pound deposit requirement to run for office
Ratio: Art 40.1 (equality) violated - signatures instituted as an alternative process

Question 14

O’Reilly v Minister for the Environment [1986]

Answer 14

Ratio: Listing of alphabetical names on ballot found to be Constitutional, as it helps people find candidate names

Question 15

O’Malley v An Taoiseach [1990]

Answer 15

Ratio: Oireachtas must revise the constituencies whenever a census discloses a major change in population

Question 16

Doherty v Government of Ireland [2011]

Answer 16

Ratio: Held, delay of 18 months in holding a bye-election was a breach of the Electoral Act, 1992 s 39(2) which had to be interpreted as requiring a bye-election to be held within a reasonable time of the vacancy

Question 17

Casey v Minister for Arts [2004]

Answer 17

Details: Did Minister have lawful authority to limit the number of permits to UNESCO world heritage site?
Ratio: Minister’s functions were ‘administrative’ not ‘regulatory’.

Question 18

Cityview Press v AnCO [1980]

Answer 18

Details: Statutory body levied employers in an industry (eg printing) to fund industrial training in that industry. AnCO determined how levy was calculated & what level it should be. Either House of the Oireachtas could pass a resolution annulling a levy order made by AnCO
Ratio: Test for whether Oireachtas had abdicated power or merely delegated authority: Power delegated must be limited to ‘a mere giving effect to principles & policies … contained in the statute itself’ (399)
‘. . . the law is laid down in the statute & details only are filled in or completed . . .’

Question 19

Laurenţiu v Minister for Justice [1999]

Answer 19

Details: Deportation case
Ratio:Held (3-2): s 5(1)(e) was inconsistent with the Constitution, based on the principles and policies test

Question 20

John Grace Fried Chicken Ltd v Catering JLC [2011]

Answer 20

Details:

Question 21

Bederev v Ireland [2016]

Answer 21

Details: Was a minister’s ability to add drugs to a schedule for regulation a violation of Art 15.2.1?
Ratio: No -Charleton J stressed the need to read the Act as a whole, meaning the whole text and any necessary implications drawn from any part of it.
Is about holisitc interpretation of the statute. Not interpreting in isolation—considered in context of tabacco regs, EU law, etc.

Question 22

NECI v The Labour Court [2021]

Answer 22

Details: The Labour Court’s ability to make up details for different things
Ratio: In deciding whether Art 15.2.1° has been violated, the court should consider—
the background to the enactment of the measure (here, that it was a response to McGowan)
its relationship to other similar legislation (including relevant EU law)
the nature of the parliamentary oversight retained
the kind of legal effect that orders by the delegate made have (here, implication of terms into a contract of employment)2

Question 23

Conway v An Bord Pleanála [2023]

Answer 23

Ratio: Re: Art 15.2.1 - The more appropriate test is to ask whether, by reason of the delegation, the parent decision-maker has abdicated its function having regard to all the circumstances, and in particular having regard to (i) any principles and policies governing the delegated function, (ii) the nature of the functions delegated and the issues to which they relate [especially any objective need for flexibility: (iii) the system of which the delegated function concerned forms part [including the extent to which subordinate bodies have historically been conferred with functions of the sort under consideration and (iv) the safeguards restricting or regulating the exercise of the delegated function.

They all agree the instructions for planning has to be published. But while Hogan asserts it is part of Section 5 of the Constitution, the other judges assert publishing these sorts of things are just a feature/require of the rule of law.

Question 24

Kelly v Minister for the Environment [2002]

Answer 24

Ratio:TDs and Senators standing for the Dáil may not be treated more favourably, as regards limits on election expenses, than non-incumbent candidates​.

Question 25

AG v Hamilton (No 2)

Answer 25

Ratio: No legal proceedings can be taken against a member for an utterance in the House

Question 26

Kerins I

Answer 26

Members’ non-amenability doesn’t mean Dáil, Seanad and their committees are immune from review of the legality of their actions

Question 27

Kerins II

Answer 27

Oireachtas cannot be liable in damages for any harm caused by the utterances of members

Question 28

O’Brien

Answer 28

Reviewing the actions of the institution cannot be made into a means of making members indirectly amenable for utterances

Question 29

McDonald v Bord na gCon

Answer 29

5 “characteristics” of administration of justice:
( i.) dispute or controversy as to the existence of legal rights or a violation of the law;​

( ii.) determination or ascertainment of the rights of parties or the imposition of liabilities or the infliction of a penalty;​

(iii.) final determination (subject to appeal) of legal rights or liabilities or the imposition of penalties;​

( iv.) enforcement of those rights or liabilities or the imposition of a penalty by the court or by the executive power of the State which is called in by the court to enforce its judgment;​

( v.) making of an order by the court which, as a matter of history, is an order characteristic of courts in this country.​

Question 30

Costello v Ireland [2022]

Answer 30

Case Details: Canadian investors could bring disputes in relation to that before a CETA Tribunal (a special form of arbitration), by whose decisions Ireland, the other member states and EU agree in advance to be bound​

Ratio:Ratification of CETA would violate the State’s judicial (or juridical) sovereignty, by giving to a body outside the State functions that substantially replaced the Irish courts’

Question 31

McGowan v Labour Court

Answer 31

Case Details: Some electricians objected to a labor contract (REA – registered employment agreement) they were bound to through the Labor Court and the Industrial Relations Act 1946.

Ratio:Supreme Court found in their favor, finding a violation of Art 15.2.1 of the Constitution.Part of their concern were private third parties were getting an opportunity to adopt their own standards and then apply them to all employees (even beyond their own sector).