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.
                     This appeal concerns the nature, scope and parameters of the courts' jurisdiction to impose constraints on the entitlement of a serial or vexatious litigant to institute legal proceedings. In particular, this appeal raises the question of the courts' entitlement to make an Isaac Wunder order in family law proceedings concerning child access and/or maintenance disputes, and the circumstances in which such an order can be made.
                     On 19 th August, 2022, the appellant made an ex parte application for leave to apply for judicial review to the High Court. At paragraph (d)(ii) of the appellant's statement of grounds, the following relief was sought:
" An Order of Certiorari pursuant to Order 84 rule 18 of the Rules of the Superior Courts, by way of application for Judicial Review, quashing the Order of the Respondent dated the 23 rd May 2022. "
                 The appellant was granted leave to appeal to this Court on 14 th October, 2024 ([2024] IESCDET 117). The Court determined this case to raise issues of general public importance as to the circumstances in which an Isaac Wunder order can be made in respect of applications for access and maintenance. The Attorney General was invited to join as a notice party to these proceedings in circumstances where this appeal concerns a matter of broad application in the area of family law and court procedure.
                 The Court granted leave on the following four issues:
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.