Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Interpretation - Coggle Diagram
Interpretation
-
living document
-
dangers
democratic - O'Donnell J writting outside court - if some judges had legalised gay marriage through constitutional interpretation hailed as heros but those with a contrary view had no chance to have a view - anti-democratic
-
historic context Sinnott does think viewed in accordance with contemporary circumstances but to not divorce it from historic context = both can co-exist
important to not push it too far, could be too subjective
Zappone what does marriage include, acknowledge living document, but couldn't redefine marriage to mean something it never meant before
US - Justice Brennan - principles remain the same but applied differently with current needs and problems
-
-
McGee v AG constitution purpose to promote common good, judges with training and experience interpret these rights with ideas of prudence, justice and charity- natural that virtues be conditioned by passage of time
State (Healy) v Donoghue interpretation of words change over time not intended to impose same virtues for all of time
Norris v AG powers derive from the people as well as the text, as the people change so must the meaning of the words
DPP v Gormley and white solicitor present during questioning, recognised living document and followed by NZ, australia, US and ECHR
harmonious
-
Kelly - presumption that those who enacted the constitution had a single set of scales that permeates throughout the constitution
-
O'B v S should legitimate and illigitimate children be treated equally - special protection for family so can be reated differently
-
Gilchrist reservations about hierarchy of rights , consittution intended to funciton harmoniosuly
hierarchy of rights
criticism
GilChrist - should be balance rather than a hierarchy, critcised approach of nullifying one right over another
Shaw right to life over liberty, allowed detain someone longer over concerns for missing girls
-
AG v X right to travel vs right to life of unborn - right to life priority (referendum after for right to travel) also now abortion is legalised in Ireland
Irish times v Ireland right to fair trial and right to administration of justice in public - could justify restrictions on reporting if necessary to acheive a fair trial
purposive
AG v Paperlink political instrument and legal instrument, shouldn't put too much emphasis on difference in language in 2 suceeding sub-paragraphs
-
O'Byrne v Minister for Finance applied a purposive approach along with literal approach - what was the purpose of the article
-
-
natural law
-
Ryan v AG personal rights that follow from christian and democratic nature of the state such as right to bodily integrity
-
-
decline
Re Article 26 and regulation of info concerning information services for termination of pregnancies abroad - challenge to an amendment of constitution - court held - constitution supreme law can't be challenge by natural law
YY v Minister for Justice HC used natural law to discover an unenumerated right to an effective remedy - SC didn't endorse this approach an answer for another day
-
-
proportionality
O'Doherty v Waters term proportionallity so widely used, not used in constitution itself - best used as tool for providing greater clarity - mistake to treat it a maths formula - different articles have different limiting provisions
-
Curtain v Dail Eireann no one 1 right method balance good, -balance needs to be struck between literal meaning and looking at it as a whole
-