O'Brien v Red Flag Consulting Ltd (Approved)

RED FLAG CONSULTING LIMITED, KARL BROPHY, SEAMUS CONBOY, GAVIN O�REILLY, BRID MURPHY, KEVIN HINEY AND DECLAN GANLEY

2.������ The background to the proceedings has been addressed in the judgment of the court delivered in respect of the application of seventh named defendant to have certain matters tried by way of preliminary issue. The Red Flag defendants were not parties to that application.

3.������ The Red Flag defendants contend that entitlement to discovery is properly determinable by reference to the issues as defined in the pleadings. If a pleading or part of a pleading is struck out, then this will have a bearing on the discovery application. Therefore, as a matter of logic and principle, it is contended that the strike out motion should be heard and determined first.

4.������ The plaintiff maintains that in the particular circumstances and given the secretive and clandestine nature of the acts alleged against the defendants, the discovery application ought to be considered and determined first. It is argued that in such circumstances it is impossible for him to fully evidence matters without recourse to discovery and/or interrogatories and that the approach urged by the Red Flag defendants presents him with a �Catch-22 situation�.

5.������ While it is not the role of the court on this application for directions to express any view on the substance of the respective motions it is nevertheless appropriate to engage to some extent with their content.