Results 1,401-1,420 of 1,591 for speaker:Eugene Regan

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

Eugene Regan: Yes.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

Eugene Regan: I thank the Minister for that clarification.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

Eugene Regan: I move amendment No. 3: In page 9, to delete lines 43 and 44.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

Eugene Regan: The Minister responded when I raised the matter of declaratory orders on Committee Stage. Can he clarify the position at this juncture?

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

Eugene Regan: A verifying affidavit will be required, in a sense.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

Eugene Regan: Very good.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

Eugene Regan: I move amendment No. 5: In page 10, to delete lines 17 to 20 and substitute the following: "(3) In this section "multiple publication" means publication by a person of the same defamatory statement in two or more of his or her media publications whether contemporaneously or not.".

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

Eugene Regan: We discussed the definition of "multiple publication" on Committee Stage. There was some concern about the appropriateness of the definition. Has the Minister had an opportunity to consider the matter? We had a lengthy debate on the subject. I have proposed an alternative definition which, I believe, reflects the intention. I would like to hear the Minister's views on it.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

Eugene Regan: I am sure the courts will ultimately clarify the position. I will not press the amendment.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

Eugene Regan: I second the amendment.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

Eugene Regan: My intention in tabling this amendment was not to over-rule the existing common law where a company can sue for defamation but whether it must prove special damage. In other words, the penultimate clause is whether it has incurred, or is likely to incur, financial loss as a result of the publication of that statement. That is where the change lies. The Minister has relied on a decision of...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

Eugene Regan: I appreciate that.

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

Eugene Regan: I second the amendment. I have not gone so far as to propose deleting the lines but in my amendment I propose using the phrase "in the course" of performing a judicial function. This makes clear that any statements made by a judge in performing his duties or making a ruling, etc., are confined and circumscribed in some shape or form, and that they relate to the case. This is an effort to...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

Eugene Regan: I second the amendment. I am speaking on the alternatives. My amendments relate to a rewording rather than a deletion, to try to insert some objectivity into the test such that "It shall be a defence ... to a defamation action for the defendant to prove that, in the case of a statement consisting of an opinion, the opinion was honestly held.". I suggest that at the time of the publication...

Seanad: Defamation Bill 2006: Report and Final Stages (11 Mar 2008)

Eugene Regan: It is an honest opinion.

Seanad: Order of Business (11 Mar 2008)

Eugene Regan: The second part of a documentary on Frank Shortt on RTE last night showed how the Morris tribunal exposed perjury by two detectives in this case. Will the Leader refer the matter to the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform? Perjury is a criminal offence but when are people prosecuted for it? Truth in the Dáil is essential to democracy, and in the courts and tribunals to the...

Seanad: Order of Business (5 Mar 2008)

Eugene Regan: In today's edition of The Irish Times, Vincent Browne has an article titled "Gobbledegook and the case against Lisbon Treaty". His argument is that the treaty is difficult to understand because the compendium version of the treaties, including the amendments, is not available. His argument is ill-informed and quite ridiculous. All the information is available. We have had referenda on the...

Seanad: Order of Business. (4 Mar 2008)

Eugene Regan: I concur with what Senator Fitzgerald said on Deputy John Cregan's letter to The Irish Times as Chairman of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Communications, Energy and Natural Resources. We like debate and need debate on these important issues. However the fundamental criticism is of the suggestion that his letter has the endorsement of the committee.

Seanad: Order of Business. (4 Mar 2008)

Eugene Regan: That provoked some speakers and I am interested that Senator Harris found his voice. I was confused as to his position on the Taoiseach and the Mahon tribunal, although an article in last Sunday's national newspaper gave some indication in a panegyric about statues being erected in Belfast and Dublin to the Taoiseach. This is based on a dangerous myth with dangerous consequences because it...

Seanad: Order of Business. (4 Mar 2008)

Eugene Regan: I am speaking on the Order of Business.