Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
1.������ This is an application by the first and second named defendants, Patrick and Noel Martin (�the applicants�), seeking an order pursuant to s. 194 of the NAMA Act 2009 granting them leave to appeal my judgment delivered on the 24th day of July, 2019 [2019] IEHC 598 (�my judgment�) and also my ex tempore judgment on 11th October, 2019 (solely in respect of costs), to the Court of Appeal (�the s. 194 application�).
2.������ It does not appear that the judgment in respect of costs has any relevance to this application, save that an order is also sought staying both judgments pending the determination of this appeal.
3.������ Section 194 of the NAMA Act, 2009 (�the 2009 Act�) headed �Limitation of Certain Rights of Appeal to the Court of Appeal� states, in its operative portions, as follows:-
��������� �194. - (1)��������� The determination of the Court of an application for leave to apply for judicial review, of an application for judicial review, of an application for leave to apply for an order, or an application for an order, under section 182 , is final and no appeal lies from the decision of the Court to the Court of Appeal in either case, except with the leave of the Court.
(2)����������� The Court shall grant leave under subsection (1) only if that Court certifies that its decision involves a point of law of exceptional public importance and that it is desirable in the public interest that an appeal should be taken to the Court of Appeal.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.