David Norris V Attorney General

1. Parties: High Court David Norris - Plaintiff v The Attorney General- Defendant

Supreme court David Norris - Appellant v The Attorney General - Respondent

2. Facts: David Norris is an unmarried, 38year old man who is an English lecture in Trinity College. He is an Irish citizen even though he was born in Leopoldville. He stated in his evidence that he was exclusively, congenitally and irreversibly homosexual. This stress of this case has caused him to develop a profound nervous illness, which required medical care and counselling.

3. Procedural History: The Plaintiff took the Attorney General to the High Court over the criminalisation of homosexual acts. He claimed the law trespassed on his right to privacy. The High Court dismissed these claims. The Plaintiff then appealed this decision to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court also ruled against him.

4. Law at Issue: Section 61 Act1861 states that “a person convicted of the crime of buggery shall be liable to be sentenced to penal servitude”. Section62 of this Act states that “a person who attempts to commit that crime, or who is guilty of an assault with intent to commit it or of any indecent assault upon a male, shall be guilty of a misdemeanour and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years”.

5. Cause of Action: Norris took the Attorney General to the High Court over the criminalisation of homosexual acts. His claim was based on the fact that the law infringed on his right to privacy. He stated in his evidence was “exclusively, congenitally and irreversibly homosexual and, as such, is not and never was sexually attracted by or to women but, from a very early age, has been emotionally and physically attracted towards men”

6. Judges Opinion: O’Higgins C.J dismissed the Plaintiffs appeal on the grounds of agreeing with the former Chief Justice. He rejected Mrs. Robinson’s argument as he believed it would be opposing to the provisions of the Constitution itself and change both the...