The man appealed the decision of the Press Ombudsman to the Press Council of Ireland. The man appealed the decision on the grounds that:
(1) the procedures followed by the Press Ombudsman in making her decision were not in accordance with the published procedures for considering complaints, and
(2) there had been an error in the Press Ombudsman’s application of the Principles of the Code of Practice.
In relation to ground 1, the man argued that the Press Ombudsman had failed to summarise the facts as she understood them, that she failed to establish and communicate the factual basis of her assessment of the Code of Practice, and that she neglected to consider key legal judgements. In relation to ground 2, the man argued that the Press Ombudsman had erred in her application of Principle 1 (Truth and Accuracy), Principle 2 (Distinguishing Fact and Comment), Principle 5 (Privacy) and Principle 7 (Court Reporting) of the Press Council’s Code of Practice. At its meeting on 19 February 2025 the Press Council considered the appeal on the grounds relied upon and on the information, documentation and submissions made by both parties to the appeal.
Appeal Decision
The Press Council decided to reject the appeal in relation to ground 1 (the procedures followed by the Press Ombudsman in making her decision were not in accordance with the published procedures for considering complaints) on the basis that the appeal did not contain sufficient evidence to support this ground of appeal. The Press Council also decided to reject the appeal in relation to ground 2 (there had been an error in the Press Ombudsman’s application of the Principles of the Code of Practice). It found that the Press Ombudsman had not erred in her application of any of the cited Principles of the Code of Practice, and that her decision had taken into consideration all relevant material submitted as part of the complaint.