Burke went too Far, he Wanted Attention, well, Xmas Pudding, in Jail, a Family of Extreme Religion; another Family close, to the Burkes, want to build, their own Private Chapel, Total Insanity, Be a Catholic, be a Christian, but dont play God, with People. Try and be Normal, Helping People, is better than a Thousand Prayers?

Posted by
Enoch Burke


‘You shouldn’t be in that chair’ – Enoch Burke and his mother removed from court after interrupting proceedings

Shane Phelan – 7h ago

14th October 2022

The mother of jailed schoolteacher Enoch Burke was removed from the Court of Appeal by gardaí after loudly interrupting a directions hearing today, accusing judges of “corruption”.

Martina Burke was taken from the court after claiming her son had been “robbed of his rights” when Mr Justice John Edwards said the earliest date available for the hearing of her son’s appeal was next February.

Wall St. Legend Warns: “A Big Change Is Coming”

AdVisionaryProfit

Wall St. Legend Warns: "A Big Change Is Coming"

“He is being incarcerated because of corrupt judges who denied their vow to uphold the constitution,” she shouted from the body of the court.

“You are colluding together, which is against the law.”

Her outburst prompted Mr Justice Edwards to rise from the bench and Ms Burke was then removed from the courtroom by gardaí.

When the hearing resumed, Mr Burke, who has been in prison for almost six weeks for contempt of court, was also removed from the courtroom for a short period.

In heated exchanges, Mr Burke repeatedly criticising the judge for not setting an earlier date for the hearing of his appeal, in which he wants various High Court orders set aside in the dispute between him and his employers, Wilson’s Hospital School in Multyfarnham, Co Westmeath.

At one point during a series of extraordinary exchanges, the teacher accused the judge of “a catastrophic failure”, described the February hearing date as “an insult to the rule of law”.

He told Mr Justice Edwards: “You shouldn’t be in that chair.”

Mr Burke also asked the judge if he was “colluding” with judges in the High Court by setting an appeal hearing date which was likely to come after the High Court fully hears the action taken by the school against him. The teacher wants his appeal heard before the High Court hearing takes place.

Mr Justice Edwards said he would not dignify the question with an answer.

But the heated exchanges continued, with Mr Burke’s sister, solicitor Ammi Burke, also interjecting.

The judge directed that the audio of the hearing be given to the disciplinary committee of the Law Society after Ms Burke interrupted and called the conduct of the proceedings “a disgrace”. He also threatened to hold her in contempt if she did not apologise to him.

However, Mr Justice Edwards rescinded that order when Ms Burke insisted she had not shouted at the judge.

The fractious scenes came after Mr Burke sought an urgent hearing of his appeal against various High Court orders in the dispute between him and his employers.

He was jailed by the High Court on September 5 after breaching orders restraining him from turning up for work or attempting to teach pupils.

The evangelical Christian was suspended by the school’s board of management on August 24 pending the outcome of a disciplinary process after clashing with its principal over a request that teachers address a transgender student by a new name and with the pronoun “they”.

Although the child was not a pupil of his, he objected to the request, saying to comply with it would violate his religious beliefs.

Mr Burke is not appealing the order jailing him for contempt of court and has refused to purge his contempt on several occasions.

However, he is asking the Court of Appeal to set aside orders including the temporary injunction restraining him from attending for work, and a subsequent High Court decision to keep the injunction in place pending a final hearing of the matter.

He is also appealing against the High Court’s dismissal of an application brought by him aimed at setting aside his suspension.

Should he be successful, it is likely he would be released from prison as the orders he is in contempt of would fall away.

At the outset of the Court of Appeal directions hearing today, Mr Burke made an application seeking the lifting of the order committing him to prison.

However, the judge, who was sitting on his own, said the purpose of the hearing was to give directions to bring the matter to hearing. He said he could not hear substantive matters unless he was sitting with two other colleagues in a court of three judges.

Mr Burke went on to allege that four judges of the High Court had failed to consider his constitutional rights to freedom of expression and freedom of conscience.

He also said that one of those judges, Mr Justice Max Barrett, had found that his case was not about transgenderism when a report which led to his suspension “had transgenderism all over it”.

I have gone from being a first-class teacher at the height of my career to being in a 12ft by 6ft cell because of my religious beliefs

I have gone from being a first-class teacher at the height of my career to being in a 12ft by 6ft cell because of my religious beliefs

“He said it was not about my religious beliefs when the report had those beliefs all over it,” Mr Burke said.

Mr Justice Edwards said that while he was disposed to accept there was “moderate urgency” to the appeal, the earliest date available was February 16 as the court’s diary was already full.

Amid repeated protests from Mr Burke, the judge said: “Did you hear me, Mr Burke? Other people also have important issues to litigate and have been allocated dates. There physically isn’t any room to hear the case before February 16. We would actually have to remove someone else’s case from the list and we can’t do that.”

Mr Burke continued to protest, saying: “I have gone from being a first-class teacher at the height of my career to being in a 12ft by 6ft cell because of my religious beliefs.”

After Martina Burke was ejected from the court, the judge said that while he accepted the issue was stressful for Mr Burke’s family, the proceedings had to be conducted with decorum.

He said Mr Burke was being facilitated as much as possible but was trying to “drive a coach and horses” through the court’s procedures.

Following, Ammi Burke’s interruption, the judge asked her if she was “on record” as solicitor for her brother. She replied that she was not but described herself as his “legal adviser”.

The judge then warned her not to interrupt again.

“You have heard what I said about people interrupting the proceedings. You are a solicitor, an officer of the court. How dare you interrupt these proceedings,” he said.

The judge also asked Mr Burke’s father Seán not to interrupt when he also made a comment from the body of the court.

The scenes in the Court of Appeal took place just hours after Mr Burke also clashed with a High Court judge at another directions hearing, this time in relation to the action against him by the board of management of Wilson’s Hospital.

Mr Justice Brian O’Moore warned Mr Burke to lower his voice after the teacher spoke loudly and appeared emotional after the judge made directions aimed at getting that case ready for hearing before Christmas or early in the New Year.

Mr Justice O’Moore made directions for the exchange of legal filings between the school and the teacher in the coming weeks.

Supported in court by his sister Ammi and parents Seán and Martina, Mr Burke queried why the judge wanted to push ahead with the case so quickly when he had appealed various High Court orders made in the case to the Court of Appeal.

“Four of your colleagues have blatantly disregarded my constitutional rights to freedom of religion,” Mr Burke alleged.

“This [appeal] needs to be decided, judge, before the trial of the action.”

Mr Justice O’Moore pointed out that it was his job to get cases ready for hearing “as quickly as can be done”.

He said he had instructed his registrar to write to the school and Mr Burke as he was concerned about getting the case ready for trial given Mr Burke was in prison and the matter related to the running of an educational institution.

The judge also said he had never come across a case before where one of the parties has resisted an earliest possible hearing.

Following Mr Burke’s objection, the judge pushed back the deadlines he had initially proposed for the exchange of various filings by a week and fixed November 15 as a date for a hearing on any further directions that may be necessary.

But Mr Burke continued to protest, saying: “I am a lay litigant taking a case to the Court of Appeal and you are fixing dates for the lodgement of documents when I am incarcerated.

“I was up at six o’clock this morning, behind a cell door.”

The teacher said that if he was successful at the Court of Appeal, there would be “a huge impact” and it would “essentially make the High Court trial of the action moot”.

“There is no reasonable cause then to be pursuing with the greatest urgency the trial of the action,” he said.

The teacher went on to accuse Mr Justice O’Moore of “not being cognisant” of his position.

Mr Burke, now please lower your voice when you are addressing me. I have made my ruling. The matter is finished

Mr Burke, now please lower your voice when you are addressing me. I have made my ruling. The matter is finished

“I will be looking for an urgent and early appeal at the Court of Appeal,” he said.

“You are not taking regard of the fact I am going before the Court of Appeal or of my wish for that to be heard first.”

The judge responded: “Mr Burke, now please lower your voice when you are addressing me. I have made my ruling. The matter is finished.”

Meanwhile, Mr Justice O’Moore made an order for the production of Mr Burke so he can file defamation proceedings at the central office of the High Court against the Sunday Independent.

He has alleged he was defamed by an article which appeared in the newspaper on October 9 under the headline: “Burke moved to new jail cell ‘after annoying other prisoners’.”

A planned application for an interim order pursuant to section 33 of the Defamation Act 2009 restraining the further publication of the article did not proceed.

Ronan Lupton SC for Mediahuis, the newspaper’s publishers, said the article was removed from its website on October 12 while Mr Burke’s complaint is being investigated.

He said his clients were willing to give an undertaking to give Mr Burke 72 hours’ notice in the event it plans to reinstate the article online.

Ammi Burke told the court her brother was happy to accept the undertaking but would still be pursuing a plenary action.

The court heard earlier this week that the newspaper denied defaming Mr Burke.

Get ahead of the


‘You shouldn’t be in that chair’ – Enoch Burke and his mother removed from court after interrupting proceedings

Shane Phelan – 7h ago

ReactComments|9

The mother of jailed schoolteacher Enoch Burke was removed from the Court of Appeal by gardaí after loudly interrupting a directions hearing today, accusing judges of “corruption”.

Martina Burke was taken from the court after claiming her son had been “robbed of his rights” when Mr Justice John Edwards said the earliest date available for the hearing of her son’s appeal was next February.

Wall St. Legend Warns: “A Big Change Is Coming”

AdVisionaryProfit

Wall St. Legend Warns: "A Big Change Is Coming"

“He is being incarcerated because of corrupt judges who denied their vow to uphold the constitution,” she shouted from the body of the court.

“You are colluding together, which is against the law.”

Her outburst prompted Mr Justice Edwards to rise from the bench and Ms Burke was then removed from the courtroom by gardaí.

When the hearing resumed, Mr Burke, who has been in prison for almost six weeks for contempt of court, was also removed from the courtroom for a short period.

In heated exchanges, Mr Burke repeatedly criticising the judge for not setting an earlier date for the hearing of his appeal, in which he wants various High Court orders set aside in the dispute between him and his employers, Wilson’s Hospital School in Multyfarnham, Co Westmeath.

At one point during a series of extraordinary exchanges, the teacher accused the judge of “a catastrophic failure”, described the February hearing date as “an insult to the rule of law”.

He told Mr Justice Edwards: “You shouldn’t be in that chair.”

Mr Burke also asked the judge if he was “colluding” with judges in the High Court by setting an appeal hearing date which was likely to come after the High Court fully hears the action taken by the school against him. The teacher wants his appeal heard before the High Court hearing takes place.

Mr Justice Edwards said he would not dignify the question with an answer.

But the heated exchanges continued, with Mr Burke’s sister, solicitor Ammi Burke, also interjecting.

The judge directed that the audio of the hearing be given to the disciplinary committee of the Law Society after Ms Burke interrupted and called the conduct of the proceedings “a disgrace”. He also threatened to hold her in contempt if she did not apologise to him.

However, Mr Justice Edwards rescinded that order when Ms Burke insisted she had not shouted at the judge.

The fractious scenes came after Mr Burke sought an urgent hearing of his appeal against various High Court orders in the dispute between him and his employers.

He was jailed by the High Court on September 5 after breaching orders restraining him from turning up for work or attempting to teach pupils.

The evangelical Christian was suspended by the school’s board of management on August 24 pending the outcome of a disciplinary process after clashing with its principal over a request that teachers address a transgender student by a new name and with the pronoun “they”.

Although the child was not a pupil of his, he objected to the request, saying to comply with it would violate his religious beliefs.

Mr Burke is not appealing the order jailing him for contempt of court and has refused to purge his contempt on several occasions.

However, he is asking the Court of Appeal to set aside orders including the temporary injunction restraining him from attending for work, and a subsequent High Court decision to keep the injunction in place pending a final hearing of the matter.

He is also appealing against the High Court’s dismissal of an application brought by him aimed at setting aside his suspension.

Should he be successful, it is likely he would be released from prison as the orders he is in contempt of would fall away.

At the outset of the Court of Appeal directions hearing today, Mr Burke made an application seeking the lifting of the order committing him to prison.

However, the judge, who was sitting on his own, said the purpose of the hearing was to give directions to bring the matter to hearing. He said he could not hear substantive matters unless he was sitting with two other colleagues in a court of three judges.

Mr Burke went on to allege that four judges of the High Court had failed to consider his constitutional rights to freedom of expression and freedom of conscience.

He also said that one of those judges, Mr Justice Max Barrett, had found that his case was not about transgenderism when a report which led to his suspension “had transgenderism all over it”.

I have gone from being a first-class teacher at the height of my career to being in a 12ft by 6ft cell because of my religious beliefs

I have gone from being a first-class teacher at the height of my career to being in a 12ft by 6ft cell because of my religious beliefs

“He said it was not about my religious beliefs when the report had those beliefs all over it,” Mr Burke said.

Mr Justice Edwards said that while he was disposed to accept there was “moderate urgency” to the appeal, the earliest date available was February 16 as the court’s diary was already full.

Amid repeated protests from Mr Burke, the judge said: “Did you hear me, Mr Burke? Other people also have important issues to litigate and have been allocated dates. There physically isn’t any room to hear the case before February 16. We would actually have to remove someone else’s case from the list and we can’t do that.”

Mr Burke continued to protest, saying: “I have gone from being a first-class teacher at the height of my career to being in a 12ft by 6ft cell because of my religious beliefs.”

After Martina Burke was ejected from the court, the judge said that while he accepted the issue was stressful for Mr Burke’s family, the proceedings had to be conducted with decorum.

He said Mr Burke was being facilitated as much as possible but was trying to “drive a coach and horses” through the court’s procedures.

Following, Ammi Burke’s interruption, the judge asked her if she was “on record” as solicitor for her brother. She replied that she was not but described herself as his “legal adviser”.

The judge then warned her not to interrupt again.

“You have heard what I said about people interrupting the proceedings. You are a solicitor, an officer of the court. How dare you interrupt these proceedings,” he said.

The judge also asked Mr Burke’s father Seán not to interrupt when he also made a comment from the body of the court.

The scenes in the Court of Appeal took place just hours after Mr Burke also clashed with a High Court judge at another directions hearing, this time in relation to the action against him by the board of management of Wilson’s Hospital.

Mr Justice Brian O’Moore warned Mr Burke to lower his voice after the teacher spoke loudly and appeared emotional after the judge made directions aimed at getting that case ready for hearing before Christmas or early in the New Year.

Mr Justice O’Moore made directions for the exchange of legal filings between the school and the teacher in the coming weeks.

Supported in court by his sister Ammi and parents Seán and Martina, Mr Burke queried why the judge wanted to push ahead with the case so quickly when he had appealed various High Court orders made in the case to the Court of Appeal.

“Four of your colleagues have blatantly disregarded my constitutional rights to freedom of religion,” Mr Burke alleged.

“This [appeal] needs to be decided, judge, before the trial of the action.”

Mr Justice O’Moore pointed out that it was his job to get cases ready for hearing “as quickly as can be done”.

He said he had instructed his registrar to write to the school and Mr Burke as he was concerned about getting the case ready for trial given Mr Burke was in prison and the matter related to the running of an educational institution.

The judge also said he had never come across a case before where one of the parties has resisted an earliest possible hearing.

Following Mr Burke’s objection, the judge pushed back the deadlines he had initially proposed for the exchange of various filings by a week and fixed November 15 as a date for a hearing on any further directions that may be necessary.

But Mr Burke continued to protest, saying: “I am a lay litigant taking a case to the Court of Appeal and you are fixing dates for the lodgement of documents when I am incarcerated.

“I was up at six o’clock this morning, behind a cell door.”

The teacher said that if he was successful at the Court of Appeal, there would be “a huge impact” and it would “essentially make the High Court trial of the action moot”.

“There is no reasonable cause then to be pursuing with the greatest urgency the trial of the action,” he said.

The teacher went on to accuse Mr Justice O’Moore of “not being cognisant” of his position.

Mr Burke, now please lower your voice when you are addressing me. I have made my ruling. The matter is finished

Mr Burke, now please lower your voice when you are addressing me. I have made my ruling. The matter is finished

“I will be looking for an urgent and early appeal at the Court of Appeal,” he said.

“You are not taking regard of the fact I am going before the Court of Appeal or of my wish for that to be heard first.”

The judge responded: “Mr Burke, now please lower your voice when you are addressing me. I have made my ruling. The matter is finished.”

Meanwhile, Mr Justice O’Moore made an order for the production of Mr Burke so he can file defamation proceedings at the central office of the High Court against the Sunday Independent.

He has alleged he was defamed by an article which appeared in the newspaper on October 9 under the headline: “Burke moved to new jail cell ‘after annoying other prisoners’.”

A planned application for an interim order pursuant to section 33 of the Defamation Act 2009 restraining the further publication of the article did not proceed.

Ronan Lupton SC for Mediahuis, the newspaper’s publishers, said the article was removed from its website on October 12 while Mr Burke’s complaint is being investigated.

He said his clients were willing to give an undertaking to give Mr Burke 72 hours’ notice in the event it plans to reinstate the article online.

Ammi Burke told the court her brother was happy to accept the undertaking but would still be pursuing a plenary action.

The court heard earlier this week that the newspaper denied defaming Mr Burke.

Get ahead of the


‘You shouldn’t be in that chair’ – Enoch Burke and his mother removed from court after interrupting proceedings

 – 7h ago

The mother of jailed schoolteacher Enoch Burke was removed from the Court of Appeal by gardaí after loudly interrupting a directions hearing today, accusing judges of “corruption”.

Martina Burke was taken from the court after claiming her son had been “robbed of his rights” when Mr Justice John Edwards said the earliest date available for the hearing of her son’s appeal was next February.

“He is being incarcerated because of corrupt judges who denied their vow to uphold the constitution,” she shouted from the body of the court.

“You are colluding together, which is against the law.”

Her outburst prompted Mr Justice Edwards to rise from the bench and Ms Burke was then removed from the courtroom by gardaí.

When the hearing resumed, Mr Burke, who has been in prison for almost six weeks for contempt of court, was also removed from the courtroom for a short period.

In heated exchanges, Mr Burke repeatedly criticising the judge for not setting an earlier date for the hearing of his appeal, in which he wants various High Court orders set aside in the dispute between him and his employers, Wilson’s Hospital School in Multyfarnham, Co Westmeath.

At one point during a series of extraordinary exchanges, the teacher accused the judge of “a catastrophic failure”, described the February hearing date as “an insult to the rule of law”.

He told Mr Justice Edwards: “You shouldn’t be in that chair.”

Mr Burke also asked the judge if he was “colluding” with judges in the High Court by setting an appeal hearing date which was likely to come after the High Court fully hears the action taken by the school against him. The teacher wants his appeal heard before the High Court hearing takes place.

Mr Justice Edwards said he would not dignify the question with an answer.

But the heated exchanges continued, with Mr Burke’s sister, solicitor Ammi Burke, also interjecting.

The judge directed that the audio of the hearing be given to the disciplinary committee of the Law Society after Ms Burke interrupted and called the conduct of the proceedings “a disgrace”. He also threatened to hold her in contempt if she did not apologise to him.

However, Mr Justice Edwards rescinded that order when Ms Burke insisted she had not shouted at the judge.

The fractious scenes came after Mr Burke sought an urgent hearing of his appeal against various High Court orders in the dispute between him and his employers.

He was jailed by the High Court on September 5 after breaching orders restraining him from turning up for work or attempting to teach pupils.

The evangelical Christian was suspended by the school’s board of management on August 24 pending the outcome of a disciplinary process after clashing with its principal over a request that teachers address a transgender student by a new name and with the pronoun “they”.

Although the child was not a pupil of his, he objected to the request, saying to comply with it would violate his religious beliefs.

Mr Burke is not appealing the order jailing him for contempt of court and has refused to purge his contempt on several occasions.

However, he is asking the Court of Appeal to set aside orders including the temporary injunction restraining him from attending for work, and a subsequent High Court decision to keep the injunction in place pending a final hearing of the matter.

He is also appealing against the High Court’s dismissal of an application brought by him aimed at setting aside his suspension.

Should he be successful, it is likely he would be released from prison as the orders he is in contempt of would fall away.

At the outset of the Court of Appeal directions hearing today, Mr Burke made an application seeking the lifting of the order committing him to prison.

However, the judge, who was sitting on his own, said the purpose of the hearing was to give directions to bring the matter to hearing. He said he could not hear substantive matters unless he was sitting with two other colleagues in a court of three judges.

Mr Burke went on to allege that four judges of the High Court had failed to consider his constitutional rights to freedom of expression and freedom of conscience.

He also said that one of those judges, Mr Justice Max Barrett, had found that his case was not about transgenderism when a report which led to his suspension “had transgenderism all over it”.

I have gone from being a first-class teacher at the height of my career to being in a 12ft by 6ft cell because of my religious beliefs

I have gone from being a first-class teacher at the height of my career to being in a 12ft by 6ft cell because of my religious beliefs

“He said it was not about my religious beliefs when the report had those beliefs all over it,” Mr Burke said.

Mr Justice Edwards said that while he was disposed to accept there was “moderate urgency” to the appeal, the earliest date available was February 16 as the court’s diary was already full.

Amid repeated protests from Mr Burke, the judge said: “Did you hear me, Mr Burke? Other people also have important issues to litigate and have been allocated dates. There physically isn’t any room to hear the case before February 16. We would actually have to remove someone else’s case from the list and we can’t do that.”

Mr Burke continued to protest, saying: “I have gone from being a first-class teacher at the height of my career to being in a 12ft by 6ft cell because of my religious beliefs.”

After Martina Burke was ejected from the court, the judge said that while he accepted the issue was stressful for Mr Burke’s family, the proceedings had to be conducted with decorum.

He said Mr Burke was being facilitated as much as possible but was trying to “drive a coach and horses” through the court’s procedures.

Following, Ammi Burke’s interruption, the judge asked her if she was “on record” as solicitor for her brother. She replied that she was not but described herself as his “legal adviser”.

The judge then warned her not to interrupt again.

“You have heard what I said about people interrupting the proceedings. You are a solicitor, an officer of the court. How dare you interrupt these proceedings,” he said.

The judge also asked Mr Burke’s father Seán not to interrupt when he also made a comment from the body of the court.

The scenes in the Court of Appeal took place just hours after Mr Burke also clashed with a High Court judge at another directions hearing, this time in relation to the action against him by the board of management of Wilson’s Hospital.

Mr Justice Brian O’Moore warned Mr Burke to lower his voice after the teacher spoke loudly and appeared emotional after the judge made directions aimed at getting that case ready for hearing before Christmas or early in the New Year.

Mr Justice O’Moore made directions for the exchange of legal filings between the school and the teacher in the coming weeks.

Supported in court by his sister Ammi and parents Seán and Martina, Mr Burke queried why the judge wanted to push ahead with the case so quickly when he had appealed various High Court orders made in the case to the Court of Appeal.

“Four of your colleagues have blatantly disregarded my constitutional rights to freedom of religion,” Mr Burke alleged.

“This [appeal] needs to be decided, judge, before the trial of the action.”

Mr Justice O’Moore pointed out that it was his job to get cases ready for hearing “as quickly as can be done”.

He said he had instructed his registrar to write to the school and Mr Burke as he was concerned about getting the case ready for trial given Mr Burke was in prison and the matter related to the running of an educational institution.

The judge also said he had never come across a case before where one of the parties has resisted an earliest possible hearing.

Following Mr Burke’s objection, the judge pushed back the deadlines he had initially proposed for the exchange of various filings by a week and fixed November 15 as a date for a hearing on any further directions that may be necessary.

But Mr Burke continued to protest, saying: “I am a lay litigant taking a case to the Court of Appeal and you are fixing dates for the lodgement of documents when I am incarcerated.

“I was up at six o’clock this morning, behind a cell door.”

The teacher said that if he was successful at the Court of Appeal, there would be “a huge impact” and it would “essentially make the High Court trial of the action moot”.

“There is no reasonable cause then to be pursuing with the greatest urgency the trial of the action,” he said.

The teacher went on to accuse Mr Justice O’Moore of “not being cognisant” of his position.

Mr Burke, now please lower your voice when you are addressing me. I have made my ruling. The matter is finished

Mr Burke, now please lower your voice when you are addressing me. I have made my ruling. The matter is finished

“I will be looking for an urgent and early appeal at the Court of Appeal,” he said.

“You are not taking regard of the fact I am going before the Court of Appeal or of my wish for that to be heard first.”

The judge responded: “Mr Burke, now please lower your voice when you are addressing me. I have made my ruling. The matter is finished.”

Meanwhile, Mr Justice O’Moore made an order for the production of Mr Burke so he can file defamation proceedings at the central office of the High Court against the Sunday Independent.

He has alleged he was defamed by an article which appeared in the newspaper on October 9 under the headline: “Burke moved to new jail cell ‘after annoying other prisoners’.”

A planned application for an interim order pursuant to section 33 of the Defamation Act 2009 restraining the further publication of the article did not proceed.

Ronan Lupton SC for Mediahuis, the newspaper’s publishers, said the article was removed from its website on October 12 while Mr Burke’s complaint is being investigated.

He said his clients were willing to give an undertaking to give Mr Burke 72 hours’ notice in the event it plans to reinstate the article online.

Ammi Burke told the court her brother was happy to accept the undertaking but would still be pursuing a plenary action.

The court heard earlier this week that the newspaper denied defaming Mr Burke.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s