The Supreme Court has posted an electronic version of the decision in Glynn v. Owen [2012] IESC 15. The case concerns the rights of minority shareholders in an environmental technology company. Judge O’Donnell’s judgment is here.
In the end, the legal issues on the appeal were relatively straightforward, but the judgment is interesting for the following statement (paragraph 17):
[B]oth the plaintiffs and the defendants represented themselves on this appeal. Mr. Leyland who was legally represented was no longer a party to the appeal. The intricacy of the rule in Foss v Harbottle has caused considerable confusion even amongst experienced lawyers, and is difficult territory to navigate at the best of times. However, to attempt that journey without any legal training and experience, is a very difficult task indeed. In this case it must be said that both the plaintiffs (for whom Mr. McCabe spoke) and the defendants (for whom Jonathan Owen spoke) were articulate and forceful in their presentation. However no authorities were submitted to the court, and while legal submissions were delivered, they transpired to be imperfectly edited versions of the submissions of the High Court, and thus of little assistance on this appeal. Very little attention was addressed to any issue of law.
Self-representation is probably becoming more common given the downturn. In one sense, it’s cheaper for the parties to dispense with lawyers, but it imposes significant costs on the courts system.
