A man with an intellectual disability who was stopped marrying his girlfriend has mounted a constitutional challenge.
The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission has been joined to the case.
The man, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, has brought proceedings after a High Court order was obtained last year preventing him from entering into a civil marriage with his girlfriend of 15 years who also has an intellectual disability.
The day before the man was due to marry, a charity which provides residential and other services for him, applied to the High Court to make him a ward of court.
It was argued that the man did not have the capacity to marry, or make important decisions about managing himself.
Order preventing marriage
Arising out of that application the then President of the High Court Mr Justice Peter Kelly, who considered the matter, made an order preventing the marriage from going ahead.
The man's siblings supported the application to make him a ward of court. He objected and wished to proceed with the marriage.
As a result, the man has brought a constitutional challenge against the Ministers for Health and Justice, Ireland and the Attorney General over laws he claims are wrongfully, and in breach of his rights, preventing him from getting married.
He seeks various declarations including that the 1811 Marriage of Lunatics Act and the 1871 Lunacy Regulations are unconstitutional, and breach his rights under the European Convention of Human Rights.
The 1871 Act regulates the High Court's wardship procedure, while the 1811 Act voids any marriage entered into by a ward of court.
Human rights
He also seeks a declaration that the wardship jurisdiction vested in the High Court President in the 1936 Courts of Justice Act, and the 1961 Courts Act are unconstitutional and breach his rights under the ECHR.
He further seeks a declaration that in order to protect and vindicate his rights the defendants must bring into force without further delay section 7 of the 2015 Assisted Decision Making (Capacity) Act which provides for replacement of the existing wards of court system and introduction of a new system of supported decision-making.
The challenge was briefly mentioned before Ms Justice Leonie Reynolds today. The judge was told the Commission could be added as an 'amicus curiae' to the action.
The Commission, represented by Eoin McCullough SC, will in the proceedings assist the court by offering information and expertise, on the issues raised in the case.
There were no objections to the Commission being joined. The Judge also put in place an agreed timetable for the exchange of documents in the case.
The matter will be mentioned before the court in January, with a view to being heard in the Spring of 2021. Ms Justice Reynolds had raised the court's concern about the length of time the process would take, given that the case appeared to be urgent.
Counsel for the applicant Frank Callinan SC, appearing with Michael Lynn SC told the court that while a lot of work has been done it would take time to prepare and finalise its witness statements.
The State, counsel added would then require time to reply to the statements. The parties counsel said want the matter to be heard as soon as possible.
