The High Court has ordered discovery of documents in a judicial review challenge by passenger-boat operator Sean (otherwise Seanie) Murphy to seasonal restrictions on landing passengers at Skellig Michael. It refused his application to cross-examine a departmental witness, while leaving him free to apply again if that later becomes necessary.
The judgment concerns these procedural applications, not the underlying challenge to the licence conditions. Murphy seeks to quash conditions limiting passenger landings to 15 May through 30 September, and argues that the Minister acted on instructions from the Office of Public Works (OPW), lacked power to impose the restrictions, failed to consult him and relied on irrelevant considerations. Those are his grounds, not findings in this judgment.
Murphy sought records of communications between Deputy Chief Surveyor John Snelgrove and Chief Surveyor Brian Hogan; earlier passenger-boat licences with comparable location or seasonal restrictions; and documents relating to departmental visits to Skellig Michael, including a visit in July 2011. He said the material was needed to test the respondent’s account of how the decision was made and what factors were considered.
Justice Max Barrett found that the parties had material factual disagreements about whether the Minister acted on instruction, whether the factors later relied on were known at the time of the decision, and whether they were considered. He said the requested documents were relevant, necessary and proportionate, and that the substantive issues could not fairly be decided without discovery. The court ordered disclosure of all three categories on the terms sought.
The court declined to order cross-examination of Snelgrove. It considered the circumstances did not meet the applicable threshold and that discovery should address the difficulties identified. Murphy may make a fresh application later if he considers it necessary.
The judgment also granted an uncontested request to amend the respondent’s name in the proceedings from “Minister for Transport” to “Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport”. It did not determine whether the licence restrictions were lawful or grant the substantive relief Murphy sought.