The High Court has struck out proceedings brought by Linda McEvoy against 18 defendants, finding the case had no prospect of success and amounted to an abuse of process. Ms Justice Bolger also refused McEvoy’s applications to amend her claim, add proposed defendants and State bodies, and arrange substituted service on four defendants who had not been served.
The judgment, dated 8 October 2026, concerns proceedings issued in March 2025. McEvoy, representing herself, sought records relating to her late mother Eileen McEvoy’s treatment after a stroke in May 2012. Her mother underwent a mechanical thrombectomy at Beaumont Hospital and required round-the-clock care until her death in April 2021.
The current claim sought disclosure of records said to relate to an investigational study involving a Stryker medical device. McEvoy’s proposed amended claim described allegations of fraud, deceit, misrepresentation and concealment, and sought damages and documentation. The defendants disputed her characterisation of a 2015 medical journal article and her mother’s involvement in it.
The judge said the article described a retrospective review of patient records, rather than a clinical trial, and did not support McEvoy’s belief that defendants held additional documentation specific to her mother. She said the case relied on speculation rather than evidence capable of establishing fraud or another viable cause of action. She also concluded that any claim based on the alleged representations in 2012 was out of time. The judgment noted that separate medical negligence proceedings brought for Eileen McEvoy in 2014 had never been served.
The court rejected McEvoy’s application to add the Irish Heart Foundation and Professor Joseph Harbison, finding the allegations against them unsupported and any relevant claim out of time. It also refused to join the Director of Public Prosecutions, government ministers, the Attorney General and Ireland as notice parties. The judge said regulatory concerns belonged in the appropriate regulatory or governance framework.
The court’s ruling strikes out the proceedings in their entirety and refuses all of McEvoy’s applications. It does not set out final orders on costs: the judge gave an indicative view that the defendants should receive their costs, subject to adjudication if the parties could not agree, and listed the matter for 10 November to hear submissions before finalising orders.