A challenge by businessman Declan Ganley over Covid-19 Level 5 restrictions on religious services has been adjourned at the High Court to early next month.
The Co Galway based businessman, a practising Catholic, claims that as a result of the restrictions, he cannot leave his home to attend Mass in breach of the State’s guarantee of the free practice of religion in Article 44 of the Constitution.
While certain religious activities, including weddings and funerals, are permitted, the restrictions prevent him and others attending Mass or similar religious services, he says.
Last November, he sought leave to bring judicial review proceedings against the Minister for Health, with Ireland and the Attorney General as notice parties.
The sides have since agreed the action can be dealt with via a “telescoped” hearing in which the leave application and full case are heard together.
When the matter was mentioned before Mr Justice Charles Meenan on Friday, Darren Lehane SC, for Mr Ganley, said his side were awaiting opposition parties from the respondents, according to a report in The Irish Independent.
Catherine Donnelly SC, for the respondents, said those papers would be filed later that day.
Hearing
The judge listed the case for further mention on February 9, when it is expected a hearing date will be sought.
In his action, Mr Ganley, represented by Mr Lehane and Neil Steen SC, instructed by solicitor Eamonn Cunningham of Gateley Tweed, wants an order quashing certain temporary regulations introduced by the Minster for Health to deal with the pandemic – Regulation 5(1) and (3) of the 1947 Health Act.
He also seeks declarations the regulations are incompatible with various articles of the Constitution, including Article 44 where the State acknowledges the right to the free practice of religion.
Alternatively, he wants a declaration the regulations do not prevent him leaving his residence for the purpose of practising his religion.
Speaking to The Irish Catholic previously, Mr Ganley stated that that he was confident his case would succeed, as “the constitution is on my side”, but that “you can never predict what will happen when you get into court”.