BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!

1. In addition to the submissions made by Mr. McEntee in Duncan's case, Mr. Brian Murray, in the case of this applicant, makes a number of additional submissions.

2. I have already held in his favour in one of these submissions where I concluded in Duncan's case that an Affidavit of Discovery is capable of being tested by cross-examination in an appropriate case.

3. Secondly, he alleges that the form in which the executive privilege is claimed by Mr. Dalton in his replying Affidavit of 16th December, 1996 at paragraph 15 thereof is not in conformity with the views expressed by the Supreme Court in Murphy v. Dublin Corporation . He furthermore suggests that the claim to executive privilege in the instant case is made in respect of a class of documents. It does not appear to me that this contention is borne out since the documents are individually identified. However, it is not necessary for me to consider these submissions having regard to the fact that precisely the same documents are the subject of a claim to legal professional privilege which has not been disturbed. Accordingly, in this case I propose to make the same Orders as have been made in Duncan's case.