Taxis are good things. As they carry speakers to public debates, for instance, they provide, because of the lack of distraction by traffic, the possibility of reviewing what is to be publicly said.
OK, that’s too sweeping a statement and applies to a limited number of occasions; say, debates on whether God exists or not.
It will not apply to debates on the legitimacy of tight time limits on applications for Judicial Review under Order 84 of the Rules of the Superior Courts, because there are no such debates.
The reliable Law Reform Commission published a paper examining the procedures relating to “ordinary’ Judicial Review and “statutory” Judicial Review, which can be seen HERE.
An examination of procedures, usually, assumes legitimacy.
Of course, there probably are some debates somewhere, but they are not public. My guess is that they take place in Dublin 4 or, possibly, at the top of Henrietta St., in Dublin 7.
The truth is, Judicial Review is a contraption. It’s cobbled together, dictated by circumstances and dubiously cast in the form of a general law.
See HERE for a previous reference by this writer to Irish Judicial Review.
Now, the legal jungle drums tell me that the State itself is aggrieved by the tight time limits in Order 84.
Judgment is awaited in a case where the State itself is seeking Judicial Review of a decision, time having run under Order 84.
A la W. B. Yeats, “And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?”
(The title here is contrived; I am simply seizing on a chance to use the plural of “taxi” and show that there is such a word and such a spelling. Too often people believe, and act accordingly, that the plural of taxi is taxi’s.)