High Court decisions are usually dry enough affairs.
They usually apply the relevant legal principles to the facts at hand and arrive at a rational, reasoned decision.
Occasionally, however, the decision can provide entertaining reading, especially when it deals with populist slogans masquerading as legal arguments.
The decision from the High Court yesterday in the injunction application brought by a number of individuals in respect of the former Crown Paints factory/warehouse in Coolock falls into the second category.
The decision addresses the populist slogans about international protection/asylum seekers and the opposition to the provision of accommodation at the former Crown Paints factory in Coolock.
The decision refers to “legal documents awash with meaningless conspiracy theories” and contains other hard-hitting statements which strip bare the purported arguments advanced by the lay litigant applicants for an injunction to prevent the site being developed.
It refers, too, to “dangerously provocative allegations”, “racist xenophobia”, “discrimination”, “a vicious narrative…by othering and dehumanising human beings”, “risk of contagion-disease carriers, threats to children-and as criminals”, “ a clear intention” to bestir “hatred” of migrants.
Powerful stuff.
The bottom line in terms of the decision was that there was “no evidence” before the court to grant an injunction.