The High Court has allowed Diarmaid Ó Cadhla to advance a limited Irish-language rights argument in judicial review proceedings arising from five criminal summonses before Cork District Court over alleged breaches of Covid regulations in 2021.
Ó Cadhla, a native Irish speaker, says he repeatedly sought to conduct the District Court cases through Irish but that delays arose because interpretation services were generally unavailable. His existing judicial review also raises complaints about access to his court file and alleged delays in the criminal proceedings.
He sought to expand the case by adding Ireland and the Attorney General as respondents and by obtaining declarations concerning EU Directive 2012/13, including an order requiring an official Irish-language version of the Directive to be made available.
In a judgment delivered on April 2, 2026, Mr Justice Conor Dignam refused those broader applications.
The judge held that neither Ireland nor the Attorney General was a necessary party to the existing challenge. The criminal proceedings involve the Director of Public Prosecutions, while issues concerning court administration and services fall to the Courts Service.
The court also found that Ó Cadhla had delayed in seeking the new reliefs despite expressly referring to the Directive when his original judicial review application was made in October 2024. In addition, he had not established an arguable basis for saying Ireland or the Attorney General was legally responsible for producing an official Irish version of an EU legislative instrument.
However, the court allowed one additional ground. Ó Cadhla may argue at the substantive hearing that the absence of an official Irish-language version of Directive 2012/13 infringes his language rights and his constitutional right to a trial in due course of law.
The judge stressed that this issue remains undecided. For now, the proceedings may have to refer to the English text or an unofficial Irish translation while the legal question is argued.