O'Regan & Anor v Lanigan & Anor (Approved)

             By an undated motion, returnable to the 18 th December 2024, five categories of discovery were sought on behalf of the O'Regans.� The relevant category for the purpose of this appeal is Category 5 which read: -

"5.������ All documents relating to the issue of whether the second named defendants ( sic ) are vicariously responsible for the negligence or other breach of duty of the first named defendant and the other surgical, medical and nursing staff who are engaged in giving advice, diagnosis or treatment or otherwise involved in the treatment and/or management of the said Gerald O'Regan, deceased, while a patient in the second named defendant's, ( sic ) hospital."

"the documents in Category 5 arise out of the refusal of the [Hospital] to admit that their surgical, medical and nursing staff who managed the said Gerald O'Regan, deceased, in their hospital (including [Mr. Lanigan])were their servants or agents in respect of whom they are vicariously liable."

             I have set out in some detail the nature of the evidence in this motion as ground (d) of the notice of appeal is, strikingly, the proposition that: -

             The motion having been issued, the matter was dealt with by the Deputy Master on the original return date.� The Deputy Master ordered discovery in terms of Categories 1 to 4 inclusive, and with regard to Category 5 refused the discovery sought in its entirety.�