Member Login

Motion adjourned where court could not assess whether interrogatories will in fact save costs

By: James Cross BL

or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments

High Court, in proceedings seeking damages against An Garda Síochána and the Director of Public Prosecutions for charging the plaintiff with one count of rape, adjourns motion for leave to deliver interrogatories to allow the plaintiff to take whatever steps he considers appropriate to see whether the defendants will permit the discovery material (and if relevant the disclosure material) to be introduced without the necessity for interrogatories, on the grounds that without these steps being taken, the Court cannot assess whether the interrogatories will in fact save costs.

Interrogatories – application for leave to deliver interrogatories - plaintiff is seeking damages from, inter alia, the Commissioner of An Garda Síochána and the Director of Public Prosecutions for charging him with one count of rape - alleges, inter alia, breach of constitutional rights, malicious prosecution, false imprisonment, negligence and breach of duty and deliberate and conscious abuse of statutory powers - detention in custody in Ireland for 385 days, including the breakdown of his relationship, the ensuing lack of access to his daughter and the loss of his job – procedural history of the case - received disclosure and therefore was able to formulate the pleas in his statement of claim - pleaded that the defendants were carrying out their public function in pursuance of a public duty, being the investigation and prosecution of criminal offences and that as such the plaintiff had no permissible cause of action as against the defendants – no plea of mala fides – wide ranging discovery ordered - privilege was claimed over a significant number of the categories but not over the garda files in respect of either of the investigations - received a very significant amount of relevant documentation both through discovery and also due to the disclosure in the criminal case against him - motion for interrogatories - failure to explain why the interrogatories are necessary – legal test – principles governing interrogatories - defendants have strongly objected to leave being granted on the basis that the plaintiff is required to demonstrate why the interrogatories are necessary and has signally failed to do so – boilerplate pleas - no identification of any gap in the knowledge of the plaintiff in respect of the issues the subject of the interrogatories, and no reason is given on affidavit as to why, despite the extensive discovery in this case, the interrogatories are necessary - answers to these interrogatories are to be found in the discovery - cannot assess whether the interrogatories will in fact save costs - adjourn the motion to allow the plaintiff to take whatever steps he considers appropriate to see whether the defendants will permit the discovery material (and if relevant the disclosure material) to be introduced without the necessity for interrogatories – motion adjourned –

Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *