Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 26 Jan 2000

Vol. 513 No. 1

Written Answers. - Challenges to Acts of the Oireachtas.

Brendan Howlin

Question:

658 Mr. Howlin asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform further to Parliamentary Question No. 535 of 23 March 1999, the cases which have been decided or come to light since his reply in which the High Court or Supreme Court found any statute or provision of a statute to be unconstitutional; the cases during that period where the constitutionality of a statute or provision of a statute was upheld by either court; the title and reference or date in each case; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1356/00]

Brendan Howlin

Question:

659 Mr. Howlin asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the cases prior to 1 January 1992 in which the High Court or the Supreme Court found any statute or provision of a statute to be unconstitutional; the title and reference or date in each case; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [1357/00]

I propose to take Questions Nos. 658 and 659 together.

I am informed by the Courts Service that 11 cases involving a challenge to an Act of the Oireachtas or a provision of an Act of the Oireachtas have been decided or come to light since 1 March 1999, seven in the Supreme Court and four in the High Court.

The following list, which I have received from the Courts Service, indicates the title of each case, the court in which each case was heard, the statute or provision of a statute involved and the decision of the court. I am also informed that the list is only a compilation of the cases where the court ruled on the issue of constitutionality. Cases where the issue was argued by counsel but not dealt with by the court or where the court regarded it as a moot issue have not been included.

The details of the cases are as follows:

Supreme Court

Title of Case

Decision

1.Riordan v An Taoiseach, 19.11.98Fifteenth amendment to the Constitution Act, 1995Family Law (Divorce) Act, 1996

upheld

2.Riordan v An Taoiseach, 19.11.98Nineteenth Amendment to the Constitution Act, 1998

upheld

3.Todd v Judge Murphy, 20.11.98S.32(1). Courts and Court Officers Act, 1995

upheld

Title of Case

Decision

4.Riordan v An Taoiseach, 20.05.99s.7(3) Nineteenth Amendment to the Constitution Act, 1998

upheld

5.Murphy v Flood, 22.07.99S.4, Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) (Amendment) Act, 1979

upheld

6.Laurentiu v Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, 20.05.99S.5(1)(e) Aliens Act, 1935

unconsti-tutional

7An Blascaod Mór National v Commissioners for Public Works, 27.07.99An Blascaod Mór National Park Act, 1989

unconsti-tutional

High Court

Title of Case

Decision

1.Murphy v GMPB PC Ltd., 04.06.99Proceeds of Crime Act, 1996

upheld

2.s.1(4), Interpretation (Amendment) Act, 1997

unconsti-tutional

3.O'Donoghue v Ireland, 24.11.99s.21(1), (2) and (3), Bankruptcy Act, 1988

upheld

4.Jackson Way Properties Ltd. v Minister for the Environment and Local Government, 02.07.99 SS. 49 & Roads Act, 1993

upheld

I am informed by the Courts Service that the information sought by the Deputy for cases prior to 1 January, 1992 is not maintained by the Courts Service and could not be compiled without the expenditure of a disproportionate amount of staff time which would impede the operation of these court offices.
Top
Share