Landmark legal case

rebel girl 15

I can see this case being a landmark case in the GAA - DRA passed the buck back the CB and it has wound up being back in court

THEY want to play football for the club they love, but have been told by the GAA they can only play for the club in their parish.

Kerry brothers Padraic O’Sullivan, aged 14, and Colin, aged 8, have taken their case to the High Court because they want to play for Listry GAA Club which is just over a kilometre from their home at Ballytrasna, Faha, Killarney.

But because they are geographically located in the parish of Firies, they have been told by the Kerry County Board they must play for Ballyhar-Firies GAA Club, which is more than 11km away.

Through their mother, Christine O’Sullivan, they are seeking an injunction restraining the secretary of the county board, Peter Twiss, from preventing or restricting them from playing for Listry. They are seeking declarations including that the failure to exempt them from rule 20 of the GAA bylaws, governing playing for one’s parish, is in breach of their right to freedom of association under the Constitution (Article 40.6.1).

Opening the case yesterday, Ercus Stewart, counsel for the family, said if the boys cannot play for the club they love, they may give up sport altogether because the GAA has a monopoly on the organisation of the game.

"They may be technically from Firies, but their hearts and souls are in Listry."

In an affidavit from the boy’s mother, Christine, she says while they are located in the parish of Ballyhar-Firies, they have no real connection with it.

They attend or have attended Faha National School and players who attended that school would have little allegiance to Firies or have much social interaction with them.

The court heard the family brought High Court proceedings in 2009. The matter was resolved with the parties agreeing it should be referred to the GAA’s Disputes Resolution Authority.

It remitted the matter back to the county board and required written submissions be invited from the O’Sullivans and other interested parties before any decision was made.

However, counsel said, the O’Sullivan’s submission was not circulated in advance of a county board meeting on July 5 last year and its contents were only read out. A vote of 33:21 was taken by delegates refusing the boys permission to play for Listry and there were 20 abstentions.

The case continues.

Clareman

I know this will seem a bit harsh, but I'm locking this thread as it is part of an ongoing legal case (in the high court) and the discussion of cases in any form of media can result in the directors of the company hosting the discussion being held in contempt of court.