The Supreme Court has dismissed an appeal by Denis Riordan challenging the constitutionality of several laws governing how Ireland’s superior courts are constituted and how judges may be assigned between courts.
Riordan had repeatedly objected to Supreme Court appeals being heard by panels of three or five judges rather than by every member of the court. He argued that provisions allowing the Supreme Court to sit in divisions were unconstitutional and that the law had failed to specify a sufficiently precise number of Supreme Court judges.
The Supreme Court rejected those arguments. Chief Justice Murray, delivering the judgment of the court, said the Constitution does not require every Supreme Court case to be heard by all of its judges. On the contrary, the Constitution itself requires a minimum of five judges only for certain specified matters, including presidential references under Article 26.
The court also upheld legislation allowing the President of the High Court to sit as an additional Supreme Court judge, the Chief Justice and President of the Circuit Court to sit as additional High Court judges, and judges to be temporarily assigned between the High Court and Supreme Court where required.
Riordan argued that such arrangements amounted to appointments which only the President could constitutionally make. The court disagreed, holding that a judge temporarily sitting in another court was not receiving a new judicial appointment but fulfilling an additional statutory duty arising from an existing appointment.
A separate challenge concerned the Court of Criminal Appeal. Riordan had never been charged with or convicted of an indictable offence and had never been a party before that court. The Supreme Court therefore held that he lacked locus standi, meaning the necessary personal legal interest, to contest its composition.
The appeal was dismissed. The court also upheld a High Court order requiring any future application by Riordan to commence or continue proceedings to be made in writing, on notice and supported by an affidavit fully identifying earlier related litigation.