Following a major logistic issue back in 2006, we had to temporarily stop our activities since the second term of 2009 and
have been hoping to resume them since, but we have been waiting for the resolution of on-going litigations.

2006-2017: 11 years since our logistic crash!

Welcome to this section of our website. If you have landed on this section, you might have received or viewed a copy of my letter to Mr Seamus Woulfe, Attorney General of Ireland, dated 19th July 2017.

This letter refers to this section which shows (above links) the 3 judgements against me in proceedings I initiated and my written submissions for the respective hearings.

This letter alleges that two out the 3 judgements of the High Court of Ireland shows an outstanding level of partiality when compared to my submissions. Indeed, the judgements of Ms Justice Dunne delivered on 4th March 2013 and of Mr Seamus Noonan delivered on 6th July 2017 show three AMAZING similarities:

a) Most of my written & oral submissions are neither accepted nor refuted, they are just not mentioned, especially the ones on Fundamental & Human Rights;

b) They are both short of the rules of Essay writing, by not clearly presenting the views of both parties and their respective submissions (especially my views & submissions), before reaching their conclusions;

c) They include insulting opinions of my character, mostly irrelevant in any Civil Matter, infringing my Constitutional & Fundamental rights regarding the “Vindication of my Good Name”.

As a litigant in person, colloquially known as lay-litigant, I believe that in some instances, Judges favour submissions & evidences of their former peers, the members of the Bar of Ireland (in these instances). As a result, still believing in Justice, I have been left with no option but to call for a reform of the Judiciary System of Ireland (with reference to the European Court of Justice) while separately looking for an impeachment of the two above-mentioned judges.

Finally, I have to highlight the conclusions of Mr Justice Noonan's judgment regarding my preliminary issue about impartiality (mentioned at paragraphs 28 & 29). It is said that in his view, these submissions were scandalous, gratuitously offensive to the judiciary of the State and constituted a contempt of court. Unfortunately, Mr Justice Noonan's views were not shared by Ms Justice Faherty when I presented her the same on the 17th January 2017 (at the hearing of a Taxation Review). Ms Justice Faherty was not offended in the slightest.

In addition, in my submissions (availabable for download on this page) on the 28th July 2017 before Ms Justice Irvine of the Court of Appeal, I requested "to refer [the below] submissions on Conditions of Court Impartiality [Part A] to the European Court of Justice [in Luxembourg] for its consideration, pursuant to the Reference for preliminary ruling. The question is: “Can Irish Courts be held impartial in the absence of an independent & impartial institution before which Judges would be made accountable for their conduct, as required by the [United Nation] Bangalore Principles [of Judicial Conduct]".

- Part A - [...] “An independent & impartial institution before which Judges would be made accountable for their conduct”, is a prerequisite of Judges’ impartiality as stated by the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct 2002, quoted by Mr. Justice Haughton at paragraph 58 of his judgement in Beades v Ireland [2016] IEHC 32;

"These Principles [ndrl: Independence, Impartiality, Integrity, Propriety, Equality, Competence & Diligence] presuppose that judges are accountable for their conduct to appropriate institutions established to maintain judicial standards, which are themselves independent and impartial."

In the absence of such, the Article 35.4.1 of the Constitution seems in contradiction with the article 29.4.6 of its 28th Amendment regarding compliance with the Lisbon Treaty and the inclusive Charter of Fundamental Rights. [ndrl: the Judges of Ireland may not be held either Independent, Impartial, Upright, Equal, Competent or Diligent by design of the Judiciary ie in the absence of an independent & impartial institution before which Judges would be made accountable for their conduct].

For more info, update or press release, please contact:
Arnaud Gaultier Sword
by email: arnaud[a] 
or phone: +353 (0)87 368 20 70