The High Court has refused an application by the Garda Representative Association (GRA) to stop new public service sick leave regulations applying to members of An Garda Síochána while its legal challenge proceeds.
Mr Justice Michael Peart said the GRA had standing to challenge the regulations on grounds including alleged legitimate expectation and a claimed entitlement to further consultation. But he found that this did not give it standing to seek an injunction suspending the rules generally for its members.
The regulations took effect on 31 March 2014. The GRA’s judicial review challenges their lawfulness, alleging that they exceed the Minister’s powers and were introduced in breach of fair procedures or a legitimate expectation. It also argues that the rules are unclear and that the Minister failed to consider the need to protect public servants’ health. The Minister rejects those claims.
The injunction application was a separate, interim request. The judge stressed that the earlier grant of leave to bring the judicial review did not itself establish a fair issue for the injunction application. The GRA sought to prevent the rules applying to Garda members, but not to other public servants covered by them.
The judge said a Garda member particularly affected by the new rules could seek to join the proceedings and apply for an injunction based on that person’s circumstances, or bring an individual challenge. Any such application would require consideration of matters including possible financial hardship, whether damages would be adequate, and the balance of convenience. No undertaking as to damages had been offered by the GRA.
The judge also said that, even if standing were not an obstacle and the other assumed conditions for an injunction were met, the balance of convenience would weigh against suspending measures that were prima facie lawful. He described the regulations’ stated aims of reducing public service sick leave costs and meeting obligations under the Government’s Memorandum of Understanding with the Troika as pressing in the national interest. He considered any individual member’s financial losses potentially quantifiable, subject to exceptional circumstances in a particular case.
In discussing the underlying challenge, the judge said the GRA’s legitimate expectation argument appeared weak in light of legislation providing that the relevant statutory part had effect despite any expectation or agreement. He did not decide the ultimate merits of the judicial review claims. The injunction was refused; the judgment did not determine whether the regulations were lawful.