Background:

The Applicant raised a judicial review of an earlier decision of an Adjudication Officer in a claim under the Unfair Dismissals Act. The Adjudication Officer had dismissed the Applicant’s claim due to the conduct of the Applicant and her mother, which the Adjudication Officer described as an “obstruction” of the hearing. The Applicant applied to the High Court for several reliefs, including an order of certiorari quashing the Adjudication Officer’s decision to dismiss Applicant’s claim.

During the High Court proceedings, the Court made a number of procedural decisions, including the decision to refuse the Applicant’s application to the judge to recuse herself from the case. The Applicant continued to make submissions on those matters after the Court had made decisions on them and did so by speaking over barristers for the Respondents and Notice Party and the Court itself. Counsel for the Notice Party applied to have the Applicant’s claim before the High Court dismissed on the grounds of her conduct, which they characterised as a deliberate, conscious obstruction of the administration of justice.

Outcome:

The High Court found that the Applicant engaged in a blatant abuse of the court process which rendered it impossible to continue with the hearing of the case. As a result, the Court granted the Respondents’ and Notice Party’s applications to dismiss the claim.

Practical Guidance for Employers:

In exercising fair procedures, be it in the High Court or as part of a workplace investigation or disciplinary procedure, allowing a party to be heard is essential, even if the arguments or evidence of that party “strain both patience and credulity.” However, there is a limit to the level of disruption which must be endured. If statements are continuously made which make it impossible to continue and cannot be objectively viewed as having any other purpose or outcome other than to impede the proceedings, the party’s complaint or application can be dismissed, but only after every opportunity is given for that party to change its behaviour and the potential consequence of such behaviour is made clear.

The full case is here:
https://www.courts.ie/acc/alfresco/05a2f04c-c8fb-4bb1-8a08-963ab1bcde03/2023_IEHC_360.pdf/pdf#view=fitH