I, Patricia Ryan, President of the Circuit Court, hereby issue the following Practice Direction pursuant to section 22(17) and 22(18) of the Courts (Supplemental Provisions) Act 1961 (as inserted by section 112 of the Courts and Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2023).
Purpose and Context of this Practice Direction
1. This Practice Direction establishes a clear and consistent framework for the management of repetitive or serial litigation in the Circuit Court, including the use of a Litigation Restriction Order (“LRO”), frequently described as an Isaac Wunder order, requiring a litigant to obtain leave of the Court before issuing further proceedings of a specified kind.
2. The Supreme Court in M v M [2026] IESC 2 clarified that the Circuit Court possesses jurisdiction, grounded in constitutional principle and the Court’s power to protect its own process, to restrain repetitive or abusive litigation in appropriate and proportionate circumstances.
3. In light of this judicial clarification, this Practice Direction now sets out the procedures, criteria, and forms of order applicable to repetitive litigation within the Circuit Court.
Scope and Effect of a Circuit Court Litigation Restriction Order
4. A LRO made under this Practice Direction may restrict the commencement or continuation of proceedings before the Circuit Court, and shall operate in personam so as to require the litigant concerned to obtain leave before initiating proceedings in any circuit, provided that the order arises from proceedings properly within the jurisdiction of the Court. The LRO must be confined to restricting the issuing of proceedings against the party or parties involved in the proceedings in which the LRO is made and be confined to issues related to the subject matter of those proceedings. See para 154 of the judgment of Dunne J in M v M [2026] IESC 2.
5. Such an order shall not restrict proceedings in the District Court (save where dealing with a District Court LRO on appeal), High Court, Court of Appeal or Supreme Court.
6. A LRO may impose a requirement to seek leave before issuing further proceedings of a defined type.
7. A LRO may be tailored to:
i. Specific proceedings against named person(s);
ii. Specific subject matter;
iii. A defined period;
iv. Particular types of applications.
Applications for a Litigation Restriction Order
8. Where a party to proceedings seeks a LRO against another party to those proceedings, the application shall be made by notice of motion and grounding affidavit, which shall specify:
(a) Precisely the nature of the proceedings for which permission is sought to be required;
(b) The duration for which the order is sought;
(c) The grounds for which application for relief is sought;
(d) All evidence supporting the application.
9. The grounding affidavit shall exhibit any materials upon which the applicant relies.
10. The respondent to the motion shall be served with the motion and all supporting documentation, and shall have the opportunity to reply by affidavit and to be heard on the motion.
11. During the hearing of an application by a party to grant a LRO, the Court may of its own motion identify a relief other than that which is sought in the notice of motion. The Court must identify the modified relief to the party who is the subject of the application for the proposed LRO and the other parties to the proceedings. All parties must be given an opportunity to be heard on the proposed modified relief, including by way of affidavit where the judge considers it necessary and appropriate. Adjournment of the hearing of the application for consideration of the proposed modified relief will be at the discretion of the judge, which discretion must be exercised fairly in light of the circumstances of the case.
Litigation Restriction Orders Made of the Court’s Own Motion
12. Consistent with the powers identified by the Supreme Court in M v M [2026] IESC 2, the Circuit Court may, in the course of proceedings properly before it or at their conclusion, consider the making of a LRO of its own motion, where necessary to prevent abuse of process.
13. Where, in the course of determining any application or proceedings, the Court considers of its own motion that an LRO may be appropriate, the Court shall:
(a) Identify clearly to the party concerned the nature of the proposed order;
(b) Identify the material relied upon;
(c) Afford that party and all other parties an opportunity to be heard, including by way of affidavit if the Court considers it necessary and appropriate.
14. Save in exceptional circumstances, the Court should not make a LRO without first warning the party who may be the subject of the LRO that such an order is under consideration and identifying the conduct relied upon.
15. The Court may, if appropriate, adjourn the matter to allow all parties an opportunity to be heard on the proposed order, including by way of affidavit where the judge considers it necessary and appropriate.
Applications for Leave to Issue Proceedings where a LRO is in Place
16. Where a person subject to a LRO seeks to issue proceedings pursuant to the terms of that order within the relevant circuit, he or she shall apply in writing for leave to do so.
17. The application for leave shall be made ex-parte to the President of the Circuit Court.
18. The application shall consist of:
a) An ex-parte docket, duly stamped, setting out the order(s) sought and a concise statement of the reasons why the Court should permit the person to commence proceedings pursuant to the terms of the LRO to which the person is subject;
b) A copy of the LRO;
c) An affidavit or affidavits supporting the application duly stamped exhibiting the draft originating document which the person is seeking to issue and providing evidence demonstrating:
i. The bona fide nature of the proposed claim;
ii. That the claim is not repetitive;
iii. That a reasonable litigant could expect to obtain relief.
19. The documents referred to in paragraph 18 must be filed with the Dublin Civil Combined Offices and marked: “LRO Permission Application for consideration by the President of the Circuit Court”.
20. When the documents referred to in paragraph 18 above are filed as required under that paragraph, the Dublin Civil Combined Offices will bring them to the attention of the President of the Circuit Court and the President will give initial consideration to the application for permission as soon as practicable. The President may decide to nominate another judge of the Circuit Court to deal with the application.
Determination of the application on the papers if appropriate
21. The President of the Circuit Court or other judge assigned to deal with the application (“the assigned judge”) may, if he or she considers it appropriate and consistent with fair procedures and the interests of justice, determine the application on the papers filed by the person seeking the permission. The President or the assigned judge may then request the relevant Circuit Court Office to inform the person seeking the permission of the decision on the application and to furnish that person with a copy of the relevant order reflecting that decision. Any such determination shall be given in writing and shall be published on the Courts Service website.
22. In the event that the President or the assigned judge decides not to determine the application on the basis of the papers filed by the person seeking the permission, the Court can direct that person to serve the papers filed on the person(s) named in the proposed proceedings and request a response (whether by way of affidavit or correspondence or otherwise) to the application for permission from that person or those persons within such period and by such means as the Court may direct. The response(s) of that person or those persons should be provided to the person seeking the permission and should be filed by them in the relevant Circuit Court Office marked “LRO Permission Application Response” and should be marked for consideration by the President of the Circuit Court or the assigned judge, as appropriate.
23. In the circumstances provided for in paragraph 22 above, the President or the assigned judge may, if he or she considers it appropriate and consistent with the interests of justice, determine the application on the basis of the papers filed by the person seeking the permission and the response from the person(s) against whom permission is sought to issue the proceedings. The President or the assigned judge may then request the relevant Circuit Court Office to inform the parties of the decision on the application and to furnish them with a copy of the relevant order reflecting the decision. Any such determination shall be given in writing and shall be published on the Courts Service website.
Determination of the application by hearing if appropriate
24. In the event that the President or the assigned judge decides that it would not be appropriate to determine the application on the papers alone, he or she may direct a hearing of the application on notice to the other person(s) and request the relevant Circuit Court Office to inform the person seeking permission to serve the papers referred to in paragraph 18 above on the person(s) against whom permission is sought to issue the proceedings within such period and by such means as may be directed. The Court will assign a date on which the application for permission will in the first instance be listed for mention.
25. Where the papers have already been served on the person(s) against whom the permission is sought to issue the proceedings, there will be no need for further service unless the person seeking permission wishes to rely on further documents which have not been served, in which case such further documents must be served at least four clear working days before the listed for mention date. The papers must, in any event, be served at least four clear working days before the listed for mention date.
26. On the listed for mention date and on any subsequent date(s), the President or the assigned judge may make such further orders and directions as may be necessary and appropriate to ensure the determination of the application in a manner which is just, expeditious and likely to minimise costs.
The Order
27. Any order made pursuant to this Practice Direction shall be expressly identified as a “Litigation Restriction Order” or, in abbreviated form, a “LRO”.
28. A sample form of Litigation Restriction Order is set out in Appendix 1 to this Practice Direction. The sample form is provided for guidance only and may be adapted by the Court as appropriate, having regard to the circumstances of the case and the requirement that any such order be framed narrowly, proportionately, and in accordance with fair procedures.
Date of Commencement
29. This Practice Direction shall take effect from 5th of May 2026.
Patricia Ryan
President of the Circuit Court
APPENDIX 1
An order restraining Ms A from instituting any further proceedings in the Circuit Court against Mr B or BB Limited concerning any matter relating to the property at [specify address], without the prior leave of the President of the Circuit Court or a Judge nominated by the President of the Circuit Court, such leave to be sought by application in writing to the President of the Circuit Court, [any such application to be notified to Mr B and BB Limited].
