The Gazette 1972

11 th Report of Committee of Court Practice and Procedure on the Powers of the Supreme Court

Recommendations The Committee unanimously ren)!lllliend as follows (subject to reservations annexcd to this Report hy Mr. E. C. Micks and Mr. J. McMahon as to recoll'lIl1Cn– dations numhered (8) to (11) inclusive) : (1) Section 52 of the Courts (Supplemental Provi– sions) Act, 1961, should he amended so as to allow a p~rty (who has hcen refused leave to appeal by the Ii Igh Court from a decision of that Court on a case stated hy a Justice of the District Court) to apply to the Suprcme Court for lcave to appeal. (See paragraph 12.) (2) There should he expressly conferred on the Sup– ~ellJe Court jurisdiction to try in the first and final ~nstancc, on consent of the parties, net constitutional ISsues initiated in the High Court concerning the vali– dty of Acts of the Oireachtas or issues arising under Article 50, Section 1, of the Constitution for the reso– lution of which no decision on any disputed question of fact is required, or any other net issue of law of impor– tance initiated in the High Court. (See paragraph 16.) (3) The Suprellie Court should he given jurisdiction to detenlline on a compulsory consultative case stated to it by the District Court or the Circuit Court any {'ollstitutional issU(', other than such issues as ar~ reservcd for the High Court or the Supreme Court u~der Article 34.3.2 of the Constitution, which lllay he raised ill the District Court (whether arising during the pr('lilllinary examination of an indictable offence or ()lherwise) 'or in the Circuit Court. (See paragraph 23.) (4) If at some future time proposals to amend the Constitution are to he put to a referendum, consid– eration should bc given to including among them one to remove the present "one opinion" rule which applies to decisions of the Supreme Court hy virtue of the provisions of Article 26.2.2 and Article 34.4.5. (See paragraph 24.) (5) All judgments of the Supreme Court which are delivered in written form should be published shortly after delivery at the State's expense and copies made aVailahle to the puhlic at a reasonahle cost. (Sec para– graph 33.) (6) There should be expressly conferred on the Sup– teule Court power to refer hack to the High Court as a SPecial issue the examination of new evidence arising on a? appeal in the Supreme Court which the Supreme C~)urt requires to he so examined. Such issue should be tried with or without a jury as the Supreme Court should direct. (See paragraph 40.) .(7) Rules of Court should require that, in an action trl('d in the High Court with a jury for damages for trongs, the questions put to the jury should be so rallied as to ohtain the jury's verdict as to the parti– eul~r wrongful acts or omissions alleged on each side ~nd as to the relevant ingredients of any damages asessed. (See paragraph 41.) . fR) In addition to all the documents which, by virtue flf the existing rules, are required to he lodged in the 127

Supreme Court for the purpose of an appeal, an appel– lant or cross-appellant should also lodge five copies of an appeal hrief containing the following documents in the Office of the Supreme Court and serve a copy of the same upon the respondent not later than thirty days before the appeal is due for hearing: (a) A concise statement of facts. (b) A concise statelllent setting out clearly and parti cularly in what respects the judgment appealed from is alleged to be erroneous. When the error alleged is in respect of the admission or rejection of evidence, the evidence admitted or rejected sha1I be stated in full. When the error alleged is with respect to the charge of the judge to the jury, ,the language of the judge and the ohjection of counsel shall be set out verbatim. If, how– ever, the references involved are lengthy their citation alone will he sufficient if a transcript of the shorthand writer's note of the lIIatter has been lodged with the books of appeal and the provisions in question are clearly identified by rderence to the page of the tran– script and hy giving the opening and closing words of each such provision as it appears in the transcript. (c) A brief of the argument of the appellant setting out the points of law or facts to he discussed with parti– cular referencc to the page and line of the case of the transcript and the authorities relied upon in support of each point. A precise citation of the authority relied upon should he given in each case together with the nUlllber of the opening page of the authority and the nUlllher of the page or pages containing any passage or passages [('lied upon and the opening and closing words of each such passage. When a constitutional provision, statute, statutory order, statutory instrument, rule or regulation or hye-Iaw is cited or relied on, so much thereof as may be necessary to the decision of the case shall be set o~t verba tim citing the volume and page on which they lIIav he found in the official edition. If the provisions' invo'lved are lengthy their citation alone as to volume and page shall be sufficient save in the case of private statutes, hye-Iaws and other provisions which are not of general puhlic application throughout the State. (d) A concise statcment stating the nature of the order or relief sought including any special order with regard to costs. (See paragraph 47.) (9) A hrief should also he filed, and served on the appellant, by the respondent setting out in similar form his sublllissions with regard to (a), (h), (c) and (d) above in so far as he does not accept or agree with the appel– lant's submissions or recital of the same. Where the respondent is cross appealing he shall as relates to the cross appeal fol1ow the mode prescribed for an appellant and the appellant in reply to the cross appeal shall follow the lIIode prescrihed for a respondent. (See para– graph 47.) (10) A respondent's hrief and an appellant's replying brief to a cross appeal (if any) should be filed and served not later than fifteen days from the receipt of the appel-