Irish Supreme Court case
Delahunty v Player and Wills (Ireland) Ltd, [2006 1 IR 304; [2006] IESC 21] was an Irish Supreme Court case in which the Court gave a woman permission to take action for damages against two major tobacco companies in what was the first step in the battle against 'Big tobacco'.
Background.
Margaret Delahunty, the Respondent, was an 80 year old woman who had been smoking since she was 12 years old, at one stage smoking up to 30 cigarettes a day. She was diagnosed with cancer 1995 and sued Player &amp; Wills (Ireland) Ltd and Gallaher (Dublin) Ltd (the Appellants) for personal injuries allegedly caused by the cigarettes that she had smoked. The Appellants sought to have this claim dismissed on the basis that the pleadings disclosed "no reasonable cause of action or, alternatively, under the inherent jurisdiction of the court." The High Court refused to dismiss the claim.
Holding of the Supreme Court.
The question for the Supreme Court was whether an action for damages against the Appellants in negligence and for breach of statutory duty should be struck out on the basis that it disclosed no reasonable cause of action.
In handing down the judgement of the court, Fennelly J (with whom the other judges concurred) dismissed the tobacco manufacturing company, Gallaher (Dublin) Ltd's, appeal against the a decision made by the High Court in refusing to dismiss the Respondent's claim against the company on the grounds that there was no reasonable cause of action.
The judge noted that it had been pleaded on Ms Delahunty's behalf that she had suffered continuing injury since 1995 and that such injury was caused by smoking cigarettes manufactured by Gallaher (Dublin) Ltd. The company disputed whether this was properly pleaded. Counsel for Gallaher (Dublin) Ltd contended that Ms Delahunty had sustained her injury before she ever smoked a cigarette manufactured by this company. Fennelly J noted that Ms Delahunty was seeking to make the tobacco companies responsible for selling cigarettes that they sold, but which she voluntarily consumed.
The Court noted that:
The Supreme Court agreed with the High Court decision and dismissed the appeal.
References.
 ;templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" / ;