Open Justice

Open Justice

Art 34.1 of constitution
1. States : Justice shall be administered in Courts established by Law
Sitting in court other than public is IN CAMERA
1. In such cases , the public and media are excluded
  1. following remain
    1. Judge jury , Court registrar ,Parties of the case & their legal team
S. 45 (1) Courts Act 1961
1. sets out a number of circumstances wer justice is not administered in public
  1. application for Habeas Corpus
    1. Bail
    2. Prohibition or injunction
    3. Matrimonial matters
      1. minor matters
        procedures involving the disclosure of a secret manufacturing process
S 205 companies Act 1963
1. allowes for proceedings wer a company shareholder is alleging oppression
  1. by majority shareholders in the company to be held in camera
    1. were the court is of the opinion that a public hearing would involve the disclosure of info
      1. The publication of it would be seriously prejudicial to the legitimate interests of the company
        Reasons for private hearing
        urgency of the case
        sensitivity if the materials being discussed in court
        Any publication which would identify parties involved in camera cases or reveal sensitive information discussed in such hearings = CONTEMPT OF COURT
        THIS ALLOWED FOR SOME transparency
        Arrangments wer made in 2001 to facilitate access to the Outcome of cases including the legal grounds on which decisions were made by the court-for benefit of precedent
        Criminal Procedure Act 1967
        Num of restrictions apply , where regarding the info that may be published concerning the defendant once proceedings have been initiated
        In such circum only the following can be published
        a) The fact that the person appeared in court
        b) The name & address of the person
        c) the charge brought against the person
        These apply until the hearing of the trail of the offence
        Evidence given in court may be reported provided that the case is one that is heard in public
        NB
      2. Rape & sexual offences
        T Judge is required to exclude public
        But Bona Fide rep of the media & court officers & those involved in the case can attend the hearing
        Verdict must be in public
        Names of the defendent & complainant may only be published by the media where the court authoriess this
        S.6 of criminal law Act 1995 imposed similar restrictions in proceedings of incest
Roe v Blood Transfusion service Board 1996
1. Parties to a civil case must use there own name
  1. Here P was obliged to use her real name rather than a pseudonym
    1. Claim that the def had negligently supplied a blood transfusion causing the P to develop Hepatitis C
2. CASE
Doe v Armour Pharmaceutical co. Inc. 1994
1. similar case person contracted HIV from infected blood products
  1. Here Pseudonyms were allowed
Re R Ltd 1989
1. Irish Times Limited v Ireland 1998
  1. No general power to impose a ban on media while trail is in progress
  2. Court forbidding the media from reporting the evidence that would be given , even though the case was not in camera
    1. Held: Not Justified
2. Under s 205 of the companies Act
  1. Comp argued proceedings should be in camera because Share price would be affected in info got out
    1. Walsh J : Justice must be seen to be done . The actual presnce of public is never nescessary but the administration of justice in public does require that the doors be open so the general public can see justice being done
Court recognise the importance of the media reporting BUT they do not accept sensatonalist or " Collour Pieces "
1. DPP v Nevin 2000
  1. Murder trial
    1. Imposed restrictions on media publishing colour pieces
2. Need to carry these out before being able to stop publishing
  1. a) Tell them to behave
    1. b If Direction of Judge wont work
      1. c) if there is a risk that Justice will be interupted

Próximo

Descrição

Resumo de Recurso

Semelhante

	Criado por sinead250193 mais de 10 anos atrás