Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Amendment court challenge

Options
12346

Comments

  • Options
    #152
    ixoy
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 17,988 Mod ✭✭✭✭ixoy


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    I've heard informally from a friend that both lodged appeals
    Pretty dickish behaviour purposely leaving it to the last day to prolong the certificate being issued. Hopefully it'll cost them.


  • Options
    #153
    NuMarvel
    Registered Users Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    ixoy wrote: »
    Pretty dickish behaviour purposely leaving it to the last day to prolong the certificate being issued. Hopefully it'll cost them.

    I imagine the hearing, if there is one, will be a very quick affair. The question is when will that hearing be. The Dáil reconvenes on 22nd September, so as long as it's done and dusted before there, they haven't delayed anything on a practical level.


  • Options
    #154
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,815 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    NuMarvel wrote: »
    I imagine the hearing, if there is one, will be a very quick affair. The question is when will that hearing be. The Dáil reconvenes on 22nd September, so as long as it's done and dusted before there, they haven't delayed anything on a practical level.

    There may not even be a hearing. I think the SC could possibly refuse leave to appeal or deal with the appeal in a written manner

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #155
    NuMarvel
    Registered Users Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    There may not even be a hearing. I think the SC could possibly refuse leave to appeal or deal with the appeal in a written manner

    Based on their appeals so far, I'd be surprised if their applications for leave would convince the Supreme Court to consider a further appeal, but I've been wrong before!


  • Options
    #156
    Daith
    Registered Users Posts: 4,934 ✭✭✭Daith


    NuMarvel wrote: »
    Based on their appeals so far, I'd be surprised if their applications for leave would convince the Supreme Court to consider a further appeal, but I've been wrong before!

    They'd really need something new. It can't be a rehash of their past appeals.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #157
    secman
    Registered Users Posts: 6,228 ✭✭✭secman


    So long as they are happy to bear the full costs of such a frivolous and nonsensical appeal.


  • Options
    #158
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users Posts: 26,056 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    ixoy wrote: »
    Pretty dickish behaviour purposely leaving it to the last day to prolong the certificate being issued. Hopefully it'll cost them.
    Actually, it's pretty common to use all, or nearly all, of the time allowed for filing any legal proceedings to consider and prepare the proceedings as best as you can. Not unreasonable, when you think about it. And in this case it's hardly "dickish"; whether they lodged their appeals on the first day or the last would make no difference at all to the eventual timescale to legislation, since the Oireachtas hasn't been sitting.

    It won't affect the award of costs. If they appeal on the last possible day and lose, costs will be awarded against them. But if they had appealed on the first possible day and lost, costs would have been awarded against them just the same.

    It's all a bit academic, though. All we have so far is the assertion of a pseudonymous poster that he has heard informally from an unnamed friend whose authority in the matter is not stated that appeals have been lodged. I'm suspending judgment as to whether they have actually been lodged, myself.


  • Options
    #159
    Daith
    Registered Users Posts: 4,934 ✭✭✭Daith


    Two applications for leave have been submitted. Now we wait for SC to reply.


  • Options
    #160
    ixoy
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 17,988 Mod ✭✭✭✭ixoy


    Daith wrote: »
    Two applications for leave have been submitted. Now we wait for SC to reply.
    And how long will that reply take? Days, weeks or months?


  • Options
    #161
    Daith
    Registered Users Posts: 4,934 ✭✭✭Daith


    ixoy wrote: »
    And how long will that reply take? Days, weeks or months?

    Don't think there's a time limit. I suspect if the SC really don't think there's anything in their application it could be dismissed quick enough.

    If it is a hearing I would say we won't have any legislation until the new year. The SC don't even sit until October afaik.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #162
    ixoy
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 17,988 Mod ✭✭✭✭ixoy


    Daith wrote: »
    Don't think there's a time limit. I suspect if the SC really don't think there's anything in their application it could be dismissed quick enough.

    If it is a hearing I would say we won't have any legislation until the new year. The SC don't even sit until October afaik.
    If the SC don't sit until October, how can they dismiss it? Not sure how this area works!


  • Options
    #163
    Daith
    Registered Users Posts: 4,934 ✭✭✭Daith


    ixoy wrote: »
    If the SC don't sit until October, how can they dismiss it? Not sure how this area works!

    No idea tbh. It could be the case it's not decided on till October :/


  • Options
    #164
    pl4ichjgy17zwd
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,053 ✭✭✭pl4ichjgy17zwd


    http://www.newstalk.com/MarRef-appeal-marriage-equality-referendum-Gerry-Walshe-Maurice-J-Lyons-Mark-Tighe

    Comment on the page:

    Would theses two nut jobs ever go and get a life for themselves. One of them is the same guy who went to prison a couple of years back because he refused to divorce his wife. He argued that she was his property under Gods Law. The courts should not be hearing cases from people who are clearly mentally deranged.


  • Options
    #165
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,815 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    ixoy wrote: »
    If the SC don't sit until October, how can they dismiss it? Not sure how this area works!

    The SC can do the following

    1 Take submissions written submissions on leave to appeal and Refuse leave to appeal if it is not in the interest of justice or not a matter of public importance
    2 Grant leave to appeal and hold hearings

    I suspect given that both cases are extremely weak leave to appeal won't be granted

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #166
    pl4ichjgy17zwd
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,053 ✭✭✭pl4ichjgy17zwd


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    The SC can do the following

    1 Refuse leave to appeal if it is not in the interest of justice or not a matter of public importance
    2 Review and decide the case through written submission only
    3 Hold hearings on it

    I suspect given that both cases are extremely weak that no 1 or 2 could be more likely

    Can they do 1 or 2 before October do you know?


  • Options
    #167
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,815 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Aubrielle Tangy Rationalist wrote: »
    Can they do 1 or 2 before October do you know?

    I don't know.

    I've gleaned the above from newspaper sources plus Dr Fergus Ryan and a friend who spoke to Michael McDowell SC at the Court of Appeal as he was representing the state.

    Actually I've gone back and checked what he said so essentially in the process above I suggested 1 and 2 are a combination!
    I was talking to Michael McDowell, SC after the hearing (as one does) and he said an appeal to the Supreme Court would probably be entirely a written procedure on leave to appeal that would be rejected.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #168
    pl4ichjgy17zwd
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,053 ✭✭✭pl4ichjgy17zwd


    This says “At most, this could delay the Government’s intentions [to implement marriage equality legislation] by about a month. So instead of September weddings, we’ll have October weddings – or, you know, later in the year.”


  • Options
    #169
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,815 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Aubrielle Tangy Rationalist wrote: »
    This says “At most, this could delay the Government’s intentions [to implement marriage equality legislation] by about a month. So instead of September weddings, we’ll have October weddings – or, you know, later in the year.”

    You need to give 3 months notice to apply for a wedding licence though so realistically the first weddings will be next year unless a person is on their death bed and the 3 months can be waived.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • Options
    #170
    NuMarvel
    Registered Users Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    Joeytheparrot wrote: »
    You need to give 3 months notice to apply for a wedding licence though so realistically the first weddings will be next year unless a person is on their death bed and the 3 months can be waived.

    There's a provision in the General Scheme of the Marriage Bill (Head 3(4)) that notices to enter a civil partnership can be converted to notifications to marry if the couple so wish. Assuming that provision makes into the final Act, there could be marriages just days after it's passed.


  • Options
    #171
    Daith
    Registered Users Posts: 4,934 ✭✭✭Daith


    The President has signed this into law!

    http://www.president.ie/en/the-president/2015-legislation


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #172
    hotmail.com
    Registered Users Posts: 13,046 ✭✭✭✭hotmail.com


    Anyone know when the first marriages will happen now?

    I presume the President signed it despite the Supreme Court challenge.


  • Options
    #173
    Daith
    Registered Users Posts: 4,934 ✭✭✭Daith


    hotmail.com wrote: »
    Anyone know when the first marriages will happen now?

    I presume the President signed it despite the Supreme Court challenge.

    Legislation will still need to go through the Dáil. We could see them before Xmas, even Oct/Nov with civil partnerships


  • Options
    #174
    NuMarvel
    Registered Users Posts: 3,279 ✭✭✭NuMarvel


    Daith wrote: »
    The President has signed this into law!

    http://www.president.ie/en/the-president/2015-legislation

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vW1hv37imjw


  • Options
    #175
    ixoy
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 17,988 Mod ✭✭✭✭ixoy


    Daith wrote: »
    The President has signed this into law!

    http://www.president.ie/en/the-president/2015-legislation

    So how could the two idiots' challenges affect this? I'm guessing it was signed in with the view their case will be refused.


  • Options
    #176
    Daith
    Registered Users Posts: 4,934 ✭✭✭Daith


    ixoy wrote: »
    So how could the two idiots' challenges affect this? I'm guessing it was signed in with the view their case will be refused.

    That seems to be the general view.

    Would explain why it wasn't signed after the Court of Appeals.

    Actually

    Mark Tighe ‏@marktigheST
    President able to sign #marref into law despite two men taking Supreme Court challenge because there's no stay order from Court of Appeal.

    https://twitter.com/marktigheST/status/637711493094604801


  • Options
    #177
    Daith
    Registered Users Posts: 4,934 ✭✭✭Daith


    Done!

    The Supreme Court has just now rejected the final leave to appeal in
    the same-sex marriage referendum cases. #marref

    https://twitter.com/marktigheST/status/644164110582681600


  • Options
    #178
    Fleawuss
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,681 ✭✭✭Fleawuss


    Game. Over. Another milestone, another step into maturity for Ireland. And because it still matters... RIP now Declan Flynn.


  • Options
    #179
    ixoy
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 17,988 Mod ✭✭✭✭ixoy


    So that moron Walshe is at it again - he's challenging the referendum certificate being issued now because the judges had yet to rule on his nonsense [article here].

    What a mean-spirited, petty individual. Can't see how he'd win - even if the issuer jumped the gun, it doesn't change the ultimate outcome. Really though, wonder how he feels about himself constantly trying to delay the will of the people.


  • Options
    #180
    Daith
    Registered Users Posts: 4,934 ✭✭✭Daith


    ixoy wrote: »
    So that moron Walshe is at it again - he's challenging the referendum certificate being issued now because the judges had yet to rule on his nonsense [article here].

    What a mean-spirited, petty individual. Can't see how he'd win - even if the issuer jumped the gun, it doesn't change the ultimate outcome. Really though, wonder how he feels about himself constantly trying to delay the will of the people.

    Nah, the stay on issuing the cert happened after Court of Appeals. As mentioned here it could have been signed anytime after that.

    The SC actually highlighted that the two guys should have asked for the stay to be extended.

    Ultimately the SC ruled there was no issue with referendum process, the cert was issued and its in the constitution.

    The SC just highlighted a what if scenario which is interesting but doesn't affect the cert as they pointed out.

    Marriage Bill should be debated in Dáil tomorrow btw.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #181
    who is this
    Registered Users Posts: 500 ✭✭✭who is this


    ixoy wrote: »
    So that moron Walshe is at it again - he's challenging the referendum certificate being issued now because the judges had yet to rule on his nonsense [article here].

    What a mean-spirited, petty individual. Can't see how he'd win - even if the issuer jumped the gun, it doesn't change the ultimate outcome. Really though, wonder how he feels about himself constantly trying to delay the will of the people.

    He can't delay it.
    1. His argument has no merit. He failed to request a stay, having chosen to represent himself. The State was perfectly entitled to issue the cert. and sign the amendment.
    2. The Supreme Court already said the State would have been better to not have signed it in spite of 1., but even they accepted it didn't matter because it's already done and there's no basis to change it. High Court would be extremely unlikely to overturn this (and not really able to).
    3. The Amendment is already law at the moment. The High Court cannot prevent the Dáil debating and passing the Marriage Bill, until such a point where it actually ruled in Walshe's favour. And that's not going to happen.

    The Marriage Bill will be debated and passed as planned. And in the meantime the High Court will hear and dismiss this nonsense case.


Advertisement