| dbo:description
|
- Irish Supreme Court case (en)
|
| dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
| |
| dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
| |
| dbp:appealedFrom
|
- Tracey T/A Engineering Design & Management v Burton (en)
|
| dbp:caption
| |
| dbp:citations
| |
| dbp:concurring
|
- Denham CJ, Charleton J (en)
|
| dbp:court
| |
| dbp:dateDecided
| |
| dbp:decisionBy
| |
| dbp:fullName
|
- Kevin Tracey, T/A Engineering Design & Management v Michael Burton, Charles O'Connor, and Burton & O'Connor Limited, and Fpq Consulting Engineers (en)
|
| dbp:italicTitle
| |
| dbp:judges
|
- MacMenamin J, Denham CJ, Charleton J (en)
|
| dbp:keywords
| |
| dbp:name
|
- Tracey, T/A Engineering Design & Management v Burton (en)
|
| dbp:numberOfJudges
| |
| dbp:opinions
|
- The constitutional right of access to the courts, although an important one, is not an absolute right. In all legal proceedings a point may be reached where the conduct of such litigation is so delayed, or so vexatious, or proceeds in a manner which either breaks or ignores rules of procedure, or where there is such significant misconduct either before court, or in court itself, as to raise questions as to whether the right of access to the court should be limited, or, in extreme cases, whether a case should be dismissed. (en)
|
| dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
| |
| dct:subject
| |
| rdfs:label
|
- Engineering Design and Management v. Burton (en)
|
| owl:sameAs
| |
| prov:wasDerivedFrom
| |
| foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
| |
| is foaf:primaryTopic
of | |
