Results 5,841-5,860 of 18,746 for speaker:Michael McDowell

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (28 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: Generally speaking, the apology would be written, although it might be broadcast in the case of broadcast media.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (28 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: I acknowledge the arguments made by Senators and think the term "timely and conspicuous" might address the issue.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (28 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: Senator Norris is entitled to his strong conviction but he should not attribute motives to those who proposed to amend the law, which are venal or corrupt. In 1991 the Law Reform Commission, which at the time was chaired by Mr. Justice Ronan Keane, published a report on defamation law. On page 10 of that report it is stated: We referred in our Consultation Paper to the representations we...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (28 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: Regardless of the electoral cycle involved, the Law Reform Commission, which was established by the Oireachtas, took the view that the all duck or no dinner aspect to an apology was an inhibiting factor that drove people to litigation and stopped them from acting decently because they put their heads in nooses when they did. I agree with Senators Mansergh and Maurice Hayes that we would like...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (28 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: No, they said they were the servant or agent for the purpose of driving the car because it was a vicarious liability implied by statute. However, they were not authorised to comment on who was to blame and it was not an admission made by the defendant. For example, in the case of an accident if a driver hops out of a bus and says he is sorry, that does not mean CIE has made an admission...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (28 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: Unless their lawyers say, "You have an open goal now. You can kick the ball in as many times as you like".

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (28 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: It is not pure venal base politics to accept his view.

Seanad: Defence of Life and Property Bill 2006: Second Stage (28 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: I welcome the opportunity to address the House on Senator Morrissey's Bill, the subject matter of which is one of great interest not only in the Oireachtas but in the country at large. It is a subject I consider to be of the utmost importance. Senators are aware of cases in which persons have entered a house or a property without adequate excuse and with criminal intent with the result that...

Seanad: Defence of Life and Property Bill 2006: Second Stage (28 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: ——the Law Reform Commission has since published a consultation paper on the subject of legitimate defence. This publication was part of a series which is being undertaken by the Law Reform Commission into the law on homicide in this jurisdiction. I ask Senator Cummins to note that the consultation paper on legitimate defence makes a clear distinction between the deployment of defence in...

Seanad: Defence of Life and Property Bill 2006: Second Stage (28 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: Yes. That would include a child coming in to steal from a person's orchard.

Seanad: Defence of Life and Property Bill 2006: Second Stage (28 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: I listened carefully to Senator Cummins and I do not see why Senator Brian Hayes cannot listen to me.

Seanad: Defence of Life and Property Bill 2006: Second Stage (28 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: May I finish? Deputy Brian Hayes keeps interrupting me.

Seanad: Defence of Life and Property Bill 2006: Second Stage (28 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: If one excused all violence used on all trespassers in every circumstance, one would be saying that in the case of a child who came into a back garden to steal apples at whom a major stone could be thrown as a result of which he or she could have a broken neck or arm no liability would apply.

Seanad: Defence of Life and Property Bill 2006: Second Stage (28 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: The Deputy did not propose changing the definition when it mattered. Senators should bear these kinds of situations in mind. I will deal with the Government's intentions in this regard. Senator Cummins's was very interested to hear about them.

Seanad: Defence of Life and Property Bill 2006: Second Stage (28 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: I intend in the next few days to put before the Government a Criminal Law (Defence of Life and Property) Bill. In that context, I intend to produce a six sectioned Bill which will deal with the issues that have been raised here.

Seanad: Defence of Life and Property Bill 2006: Second Stage (28 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: I will tell the Senator that. The Government Bill will have extensive definitions of dwellings, curtilages, arrestable offences, harm, property and the like. It will also deal with the meaning of the use of force and will describe what is and is not a use of force and when a threat of force can be reasonable even though the actual use of force might not be. It will also deal with...

Seanad: Defence of Life and Property Bill 2006: Second Stage (28 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: We do not.

Seanad: Defence of Life and Property Bill 2006: Second Stage (28 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: On a point of order, the Senator seems to have misunderstood me.

Seanad: Defence of Life and Property Bill 2006: Second Stage (28 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: I told the Chair and the House that we intend to allow the Bill to proceed to Committee Stage.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Committee Stage (Resumed) (28 Feb 2007)

Michael McDowell: That would have been a different matter. The writer could have stated that the facts of a particular case warranted my arrest, but it looked like a statement of opinion rather than a statement of fact that I had done something unlawful. I tend to take these matters with a grain of salt. It is important to have a system of law in which people's honest opinions are statable when they are...