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 a supplementary judgment following on the court�s judgment of 12th February in the above-entitled proceedings ( [2021] IEHC 96 ). Further to the order made pursuant to that judgment, the court, on 19th February 2021, received from An Garda S�och�na a USB stick containing a copy of a variety of voice and video recordings, the originals of which are in the possession of An Garda S�och�na. The court is grateful to An Garda S�och�na for providing the USB stick so promptly.
2.������ In the first of the above-entitled proceedings, discovery of the form identified by the court at para.1 of its previous judgment has been sought by Mr A. In this regard, the court has now listened to and/or viewed all of the recordings on the USB stick.�
4.������ Most significantly, the court notes that all of the recordings that it has listened to and/or viewed to this time are relevant, inter alia , for the reason stated at point (II) in the preceding paragraph. This is of significance because s.3(1) of the Guardianship of Infants Act 1964, as amended, provides , inter alia , as follows:
��������� �Where, in any proceedings before any court, the - (a) guardianship, custody or upbringing of, or access to, a child�is in question, the court, in deciding that question, shall regard the best interests of the child as the paramount consideration.� [Emphasis added].
5.������ The parties will recall that at para.33 of its previous judgment, the court indicated that it seemed to it that:
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.