Legally Fond

We reveal the winner of our FE1/King's Inns entrance exam revision course with thanks to LawSchool.ie...

In the final episode of Legally Fond, Gavin speaks to Frank Buttimer, the solicitor of Ian Bailey. Ian was a suspect in the 1996 murder of Sophie Toscan Du Plantier. The French government tried to extradite him three times to France, the country Ms Toscan Du Plantier was from. However, the Irish courts prevented this three times. In 2019, Ian was found guilty of her murder in a court in Paris despite having never been present at the trial.

In this week’s episode the team explain and discuss the functions of tribunals. How do they differ from regular courts of law? What protection is afforded to those who are the subjects of a tribunal’s inquiry? Pierce, Gavin, and Alex share their thoughts on these questions and more by looking at one of the longest running and most expensive legal exercises in the history of the State: The Tribunal of Inquiry into Certain Planning Matters and Payments, more commonly known as ‘The Mahon Tribunal’. How corrupt were successive Fianna Fail governments in their handling of the country’s planning regime? Who were the key players? Which of them were hung out to dry and which of them escaped the long arm of the law? Tune into the latest episode from Legally Fond to find out.

In this week’s episode, Gavin, Pierce and Alex discuss the UK Supreme Court judgment in Lee v Ashers Baking Company. This case, known colloquially as the 'gay cake case'  concerned alleged discrimination over a refusal to print a pro-gay marriage message on a cake. To what end can a business refuse to cater to a customer and on what grounds? Does free speech extend to a freedom to refuse to say something? Are such entitlements applicable to a business? Are beloved puppets Bert and Ernie in the Muppets or in Sesame Street? Tune in to latest episode of Legally Fond to hear the team answer these tough questions and more.

"We didn't change the law, we didn't make the law. All we did was assert the law." In this week's episode of Legally Fond, you'll hear an interview with former Uber driver James Farrar who was one of the lead claimants in the recent Supreme Court case which established that Uber drivers are workers under English Law. This judgment means, among other things, that Uber drivers are entitled to be paid the national minimum wage. Irishman Farrar discusses how he came to take this case, his thoughts on the Uber driver contract which was heavily criticised by the Court and the compatibility of the gig economy with employees' rights.

This week on Legally Fond, Pierce, Gavin and Alex tackle the topic of impartial political coverage by RTE by examining the case of Coughlan v Broad Complaints Commission. The case concerns the state broadcaster’s engagement with the issues of the 1995 Divorce referendum. The team explain what uncontested party-political broadcasts are and why they may be controversial. How important is it for RTE to afford equal airtime to both sides of the debate in a national referendum? What are the consequences if they fail to do so? This episode will discuss.

We discuss the case of a man who left his car unattended on Dublin's Talbot Street with the engine running. The car was subsequently stolen and collided with a pedestrian. The injured pedestrian sued the owner of the car for his negligence in leaving the car open and running on a busy city street. But was it foreseeable that the car thief would drive so carelessly as to hit a pedestrian?

In this week’s episode of Legally Fond the team look at a case concerning a High Court decision to allow a blood transfusion to be administered to a woman who had previously refused it on religious grounds. Gavin, Pierce and Alex pick apart constitutional concerns, questions regarding capacity and examine the delicate exercise of rights balancing that the courts must master. How far does someone’s right to religious expression extend? Is it ever okay for clinicians to disregard the express wishes of a patient in order to save their life? How do the Irish Courts respond to these literal life and death scenarios? This episode will discuss.

We discuss the European Commission decision on Google's comparison shopping service. How will this affect the big tech firms and is breaking them up in order to open the market the correct approach?

In this week’s episode of Legally Fond, the team discuss the recent High Court challenge to the Leaving Certificate system of calculated grades by Belvedere student Freddie Sherry. Pierce, Gavin and Alex discuss Mr Justice Meenan’s decision in the case and what ramifications it will have for some sixty other similar challenges already lodged to the courts. What is the significance of school historical data and why did the Department of Education revise its policy on the matter? Was Norma Foley’s decision ‘arbitrary, unfair, unreasonable, irrational or unlawful’? Was Freddie Sherry or his school treated unfairly and if so, does it even matter if the policy benefits the student population at large? Find out in this episode.

In this week’s episode of Legally Fond, the team discuss Rockall – a small, uninhabited islet in the north Atlantic but the subject of much dispute and disagreement. Pierce, Gavin, and Alex explain the legal confusion surrounding the rightful ownership of Rockall, touching on international Maritime Law and the positions of the EU and UN on the matter. Does Rockall belong to Iceland, Ireland, Denmark, or the United Kingdom? Which nations can harvest its fish-rich waters? How does Rockall fit into the European Common Fisheries Policy and has the UK’s Brexit deal shone any light on who can lay claim to Rockall? This episode answers these questions.

In the flagship episode of season three, we discuss the seminal Supreme Court decision in the recent environmental case ‘Friends of the Irish Environment v Government of Ireland’. We explain why the government’s climate action plan was struck down and explore what this means for Ireland’s fight against climate change. With the coalition government facing ever increasing pressure to tackle climate change in Ireland, how does this judgment affect Ireland’s plan to be carbon neutral by 2050?

In March 2019, Sunday Times Journalist Mark Tighe returned to his desk and found two documents waiting for him. One was a photocopy of a cheque made out to the FAI by its then Chief Executive John Delaney for €100,000. The other was a confirmation from the FAI that John Delaney had been repaid €100,000. What was this about, thought Mark. Why was an organisation which received €50 million in taxpayers' funding over the past decade in need of a loan from its Chief Executive? This was the catalyst for a series of events which culminated in Delaney leaving the FAI and the organisation requiring a state bailout of nearly €20 million. But mere hours before the Sunday Times was going to print with the story, Delaney went to the High Court seeking an injunction against the newspaper publishing it. Find out why in this episode of Legally Fond, when Gavin speaks to Tighe about this legal skirmish. The story is chronicled in Champagne Football, a book written by Mark which we would highly recommend, even for those who are not soccer fans.

Legally Fond is returning for a third season, starting on Wednesday 24th February.You’ll hear about how one of the biggest names in Irish football took on The Sunday Times in court to stop it publishing a story about him only hours before the paper was set to be printed.And we’re teaming up with Trinity College Students’ Union for Green Week and we’ll tell you the story of the a group of climate activists who stopped the government’s climate action plan.We cannot wait for you to join us for Season Three of LF, in association with LawSchool.ie. Starting Wednesday 24th February.

Earlier this year, the General Court of the European Union found against the European Commission in the so-called 'Apple tax case'. This meant that the Commission was unable to prove to the required standard that the Irish government had given Apple illegal state aid in order to reduce its tax bill. The result is that Ireland is not entitled to the €13 billion which the Commission decided it should receive from Apple. How did this case come about? We discuss in the Season Two finale of Legally Fond.

Although many consider the Irish Presidency a largely ceremonial role, one significant constitutional power which the President has is the right to refer bills to the Supreme Court to check their constitutionality before they are made law. One such case considered whether a law requiring property developers to sell up to 20% of their new houses to the state for use as social housing. We discussed the merits of this case and the pitfalls of letting the President get involved.

It is an oddity of Irish politics that in 2001, when nearly 53% of voters opted to reject the EU's Nice Treaty, the Irish Government tried a 'second time lucky' approach, holding a second referendum on the same question. It passed, with 62% in favour. The same series of events occurred with the Lisbon Treaty later in the decade. Why is it that Ireland was the only member state of the EU which had to vote by referendum on the Nice and Lisbon Treaties? We discuss the case which led to this constitutional requirement, Ireland's relationship with the EU and the value of holding such votes.

A week on from Chief Justice Frank Clarke's publication of his correspondence with Seamus Woulfe, we discuss what has happened since and what might happen next. Also, could this saga lead to the reform of judicial appointments?

Artificial intelligence is revolutionising how we do business. With its countless opportunities, it also presents risks. To what extent will we be delegating our decision making to computers and robots? Do we trust them to make accurate decisions? And who will be responsible if AI discriminates or makes an unfair decision? Paul MacDonnell from the Global Digital Foundation discusses a recent paper he published on the regulation of artificial intelligence.

The controversy trundles on over the attendance of Supreme Court Justice Seamus Woulfe's attendance at the Oireachtas Golf Society dinner in August. Last Sunday, the Chief Justice Frank Clarke sent a letter to Woulfe, who has not yet sat on the court, asking him to resign. We chronicle the events which led up to this moment and ponder the uncertain political and legal horizon.

Should somebody who has been a smoker for many decades be able to sue a tobacco company for their personal injuries? The case we discuss this week deals with this question. The tobacco company sought to have the case thrown out of court on the grounds that it was "frivolous and vexatious".

If the Gardai break your constitutional rights by storming into your house, collect incriminating evidence with a search warrant which is faulty, defective or has the wrong address on it, should they be able to use this evidence against you at trial? The Irish courts have to take into account the interests of the Gardai in investigating crime while preserving the rights of those accused of being involved in criminal activity.

In 1980s conservative Ireland, when the state was under the wrath of the Catholic Church, gay rights activist David Norris challenged a criminal law forbidding sodomy. His case failed in the High Court and was shot down in the Supreme Court. Determined, Norris took his case to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. At every step of his legal battle, the Irish state fought back. Though he eventually succeeded, even the Irish judge sitting on the Strasbourg court found against him. David Norris discusses his decade-long litigation which resulted in the de-criminalisation of homosexuality and what it is like for an individual to sue the state.

We discuss a tragic case in which a pedestrian lost their eye after having an egg thrown in her direction. The egg was thrown by the passenger of a car driven by a 17 year-old. But why did the injured pedestrian sue the 17 year-old driver, rather than the person who threw the egg? We discuss in this episode of Legally Fond.

Everyone loves a good underdog story. And being Irish, we wanted to focus on two cases of indigenous companies taking on big business.The first is a case of David versus Goliath - of Supermac versus BigMac. What happened when an Irish fast food chain took on one of the world’s biggest?Also, if you see a pair of sports shorts with three stripes down the side, which brand do you think they are? Germany’s Adidas claims that GAA favourite O’Neills is passing off their shorts as being from Adidas. But who was victorious in court? We discuss their 1980s legal battle.

Jordi Casamitjana practices ethical veganism. For example, he has not dated non-vegans and he avoids social gatherings if the food served is not vegan. When he was dismissed from his job at a charity, he tried to assert that his form of ethical veganism is a 'philosophical belief' under the Equality Act 2010, a piece of legislation which prevents workplace discrimination on certain grounds. Did he succeed? We discuss this case in detail.

Shane Ross speaks to Legally Fond about his proposed reform to judicial appointments. He also gives his thoughts on the position of Seamus Wolfe - the former Attorney General and now Supreme Court judge - in light of his attendance at the Oireachtas Golf Society dinner.Art 35.1 of the Constitution stares that judges are appointed by the President. However, the President only acts “on the advice of the Government” (Art 13.9). The Government is therefore the de facto picker of judges.In 1995, one judicial appointment brought down a government, such is the politics involved in deciding who becomes a judge.Since then, the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board (JAAB) advises the government on suitable candidates for appointment to the bench. JAAB comprises the Presidents of every Irish court, a solicitor, a barrister and two people appointed by the Minister for Justice. Remarkably, JAAB has never interviewed any candidates.Shane Ross wanted to reform JAAB, giving more weight to the voices of ordinary people. His vision was for a Commission with a majority of lay people (non-lawyers) and a lay chairperson. Ross believed that this would reduce political bias in judicial appointments and give opportunities to candidates who were not allied to the political party then in government. Amid fierce opposition, this Bill lapsed when the Dáil & Seanad were dissolved in January.

On Wednesday September 30th we launch Season Two of Legally Fond, with the release of two episodes.How are judges chosen in Ireland? You'll hear from a former Irish government minister on why he believes it the selection process should be largely handed over to "lay people" (non-lawyers, in plain English). In the second episode, we discuss whether veganism should qualify as a philosophical belief. We'll debate a recent case which found that it should.Make sure to subscribe to get these episodes as they are released and don't forget to tell a friend!

Over the past number of years we have voted on removing blasphemy from the constitution, extending the right to marriage to same-sex couples, repealing the eighth amendment and lowering the minimum age to become President. As Ireland moves from a socially conservative backdrop to a progressive, globalist outlook, how will this continue to affect our constitution? Should we have a right to housing or a right to healthcare? How does Ireland's constitution compare to those in other countries. We enlisted an expert to answer these questions. Dr David Kenny is an Assistant Professor in Law at Trinity College Dublin and teaches Constitutional Law.

In this episode we discuss the infamous Hulk Hogan sex tape case, in which the popular WWE wrestler sued Gawker Media, a publisher which made public a sex tape of his. Not long after the awarding $140 million damages to Hogan, Gawker filed for bankruptcy. Pierce, Alex and Gavin discuss the extent to which celebrities have a right to privacy, the limits of the freedoms of the press and the controversial funding of the lawsuit by Silicon Valley billionaire Peter Thiel.

With climate change taking over the political and cultural agendas, we discuss two cases in which the courts got involved in the debate. The first is the recent UK decision which found that the British Government had broken the law in its plans for Heathrow's third runway. The second case, relating to Dublin Airport's new runway, discovered a constitutional right to an environment. Alex, Pierce and Gavin mused the power of judges and whether it is appropriate for them to have input into political questions such as the response to global warming.

Charitable status in Irish law gives an organisation a number of benefits, primarily a tax exemption. It is extended to many organisations including museums, medical research bodies and campaigning groups. Should golf and sports clubs more generally receive charitable status? Pierce, Alex and Gavin discussed the Killarney Golf Club case.

One sports commentator decides to pitch a stand peering over the wall into a racecourse, where he can commentate from and broadcast it on the radio. The racecourse isn't one bit happy - but are any of their legal rights being breached? Pierce, Alex and Gavin discuss.

We spoke to Senator, Barrister and Law Professor Ivana Bacik about the recent emergency legislation passed giving powers to the Minister for Health and the Gardai in light of the Covid 19 crisis. Senator Bacik explained the human rights implications to this legislation and how it "would not be countenanced" in normal times. We also caught up with our ear to the ground: Sargeant Des O'Hurley.

If you trespass onto somebody else's property, use it for a 12 year-uninterrupted period on your own, you are entitled to become the legal owner of that property. Why is this allowed? Is anyone entitled to do this? And does this conflict with the basic property rights which hold our society together? Pierce, Alex and Gavin discuss the law around adverse possession and the case of Dunne v Irish Rail.

Do you own your voice? What if someone impersonates you - have they breached your rights? This is the subject of the case we covered in this episode. We chat about the time singer and actress Bette Midler sued Ford, who used an impersonator to sing one of her songs in their ads, leading people to believe that she was endorsing the car. Did she succeed? Find out in this episode.

In 2003, Mary Kelly broke into Shannon Airport in the West of Ireland and damaged a plane belonging to the US military. She justified her actions on the basis that she was acting to "save the innocent lives of people in Iraq". Pierce, Alex and Gavin consider the nature of the crime which Ms Kelly was put on trial for, the defence which she attempted to use and how she, a non-lawyer, outsmarted everyone in the court - including the judge. We also discuss Irish neutrality.

In the dullness of mid-1990s suburbia, Pepsi shot an advertisement for a new promotion. Customers could collect points by buying soft drinks to win branded merchandise, such as t-shirts and sunglasses. At the end of the ad, a Harrier fighter jet appears on screen with the subtitle - '7,000,000 Pepsi Points'. For Pepsi's sake, this was meant in jest. When 21 year-old student John Leonard sent in a letter with 7,000,000 points claiming he was entitled to the jet, what happened next? Pierce, Alex and Gavin discuss.

Portmarnock Golf Club still refuses to let women be full members. This is totally legal, according to the Supreme Court. But why so? And should the law be changed? Pierce, Alex & Gavin discuss...

In this episode we put ourselves into a judge's position and try to figure out whether the law in Ireland would permit compulsory vaccinations. We look at two significant Irish cases. We also debate the practical implications of compulsory vaccinations.

Is it defamatory to describe somebody as a 'gay bachelor' if they are in fact heterosexual? In this episode we look at the case of Reynolds v Malocco. We also delve into society's changing attitudes towards homosexuality; the importance of freedom of speech and the tabloid expose culture which has led to poor journalism.

In March 2015, Ecstasy, Magic Mushrooms, Ketamine and a host of other drugs were legalised for 24 hours in Ireland. Why did this happen? Who made the decision? How did the country not erupt into chaos? In this episode, Alex, Pierce & Gavin delve into the case of Bederev v Ireland and explain the basics of Irish constitutional law.

"TWO YEAR OLD GIRL SUES HER GRANNY AFTER SPILLING TEA ON HERSELF!" In this episode we discuss the case of Moynihan v Moynihan, a case from the 1970s in Ireland. Why is the girl suing her granny? Is this an early example of the so-called compensation culture? Did she win her case? Alex, Pierce & Gavin explain the law behind the case and give their thoughts on the judgment.