An attempt by a former diocesan secretary to expand the grounds of her appeal against the High Court's rejection of her claim that she was entitled to a job for life, has been rejected by the Supreme Court.
Mary Sheehy (53), Green Road, Carlow, lost a legal challenge two years ago to the decision to make her redundant from her position with the diocese of Kildare and Leighlin.
In what her counsel accepted was an "unusual" application yesterday, her lawyers sought to adduce further evidence in her forthcoming Supreme Court appeal against the High Court's rejection of her claim that she was wrongfully dismissed from her post. A date for the appeal has yet to be fixed.
Angela Heavey, for Ms Sheehy, argued that this further material and various amendments of legal documents was necessary in the "interests of justice". Ms Heavey said she was part of Ms Sheehy's new legal team who had considered the legal papers and believed this approach was necessary. She also sought leave to cross-examine a number of people in the appeal, including the vicar general of the diocese, Fr Brendan Byrne.
Certain matters had only come to light with Ms Sheehy's recovery from "nervous shock", counsel added.
Tom Mallon, for the defendants, said the "extraordinary" motion brought on behalf of Ms Sheehy was without merit and effectively sought to change the pleadings and relitigate the entire case. Ms Sheehy had had a full hearing before the High Court, was represented there by eminent senior and junior counsel and very experienced solicitors, and had lost her case, he said.
Mr Mallon said Ms Heavey had also made a lot of "wholly inappropriate utterances" alleging dishonesty and suppression of documents which claims she had made at previous hearings "without an iota of evidence". She had failed on all other occasions to back up such claims, he said.
When Ms Heavey said Mr Mallon was wrong to argue she was not entitled to claim dishonesty, Mr Justice Brian McCracken said this was a very serious claim to make and should only be made if it was backed up by evidence.
After considering the submissions, Mr Justice McCracken, sitting with Mr Justice Nicholas Kearns and Ms Justice Fidelma Macken, delivered the court's unanimous decision that Ms Sheehy's motion was "completely misconceived".
Mr Justice McCracken said Ms Sheehy sought to cross-examine witnesses who had not given evidence in her case before the High Court and there was no legal basis for this.
"Ms Sheehy had every opportunity to give her evidence in the High Court and there was no suggestion now of new evidence she could give," he said.
He said the Supreme Court conducted an appeal based on the transcripts of the High Court and the pleadings before it and nothing else. He dismissed the motion and granted costs to the defendants. The court had not been referred to "any principle of law or any form of jurisprudence to support the motion", he added.