The Supreme Court has allowed the State to present oral evidence on whether tobacco restrictions are proportionate, setting aside a High Court order that had barred evidence on facts admitted in the pleadings.
In a judgment delivered on 3 May 2005, Mr Justice Geoghegan said the proportionality of the challenged legislation remained in issue. Admissions about tobacco’s health effects and the legislature’s stated concerns did not resolve whether the restrictions were proportionate. The State was therefore entitled to offer evidence of objective external facts relevant to that question.
The case concerns a constitutional challenge to anti-smoking legislation brought by tobacco companies and two named individual plaintiffs against the Minister for Health and Children, Ireland, the Attorney General and the Office of Tobacco Control. The High Court had entered the proceedings in its Commercial List and made the appealed case-management order on 30 July 2004.
The Supreme Court said the appeal concerned the State’s ability to call evidence in an ordinary constitutional action. It did not decide whether evidence may be heard in an Article 26 reference, where a Bill’s constitutionality is considered within a 60-day period; that issue remained undecided. Nor did the Court rule on the other grounds raised in the appeal.
The Court allowed the appeal and set aside the High Court order. It did not decide in advance that every item of evidence proposed by the State must be admitted: the trial judge may later rule on whether particular evidence is unnecessary. The Court said the earlier ruling was premature.