Covid vaccine conspiracy theorists to be hit with legal bill over …

Among the “baseless allegations” made in the lawsuit taken by Sharon Browne, David Egan and Emmanual Lavery are that the HSE was responsible for “mass killing” comparable to Nazi Germany and that the vaccine was “part of a plan by Bill Gates to depopulate the world”.

Mr Justice Michael Twomey said the “breath-taking” claims were made in 5,000 pages of affidavits and exhibits in which the “alleged evidence” was “a combination of hearsay, speculation, commentary, questions, internet sites, blogs and YouTube videos”.

The judge made the comments while rejecting a pre-trial application from the plaintiffs for a protective costs order, which would have protected them from having to pay legal costs in the event of losing the case.

He said it was the court’s provisional view that they should almost immediately face the costs of the pre-trial application and that steps could be taken to enforce the order against them.

The move is evidence of a get-tough stance by the court against “scandalous litigation”.

Usually when costs orders are made, there is a provision that the sum owed can be decided by the Office of Legal Costs Adjudicators if there is no agreement between the parties. This can mean costs do not get paid for several years or at all by the party on the receiving end of a costs order.

But the judge said in this instance his provisional view was that the costs should be measured by the court and that no stay should be put on the order, allowing the State parties to enforce payment as soon as possible.

He said he would hear submissions from the parties on all of these issues next month before finalising the terms of any final orders.

While acknowledging their right of access to the courts, he said the litigants could not have a “free go” and that if the case was to continue, possibly hundreds of thousands of euro in court resources and taxpayers’ funds would end up being expended.

The judge said his approach to the issue of costs would reduce “the risk of the administration of justice being brought into disrepute by the court room being used at taxpayers’ expense as a cheap way for litigants to air scandalous claims against civil/public servants and achieve publicity for conspiracy theories or other causes, as if the courts were some sort of debating society”.

Mr Justice Twomey added: “Discouraging such litigation is a matter of considerable significance as unmeritorious and scandalous litigation is not a cost-free exercise.”

Among the “unprecedented” orders sought by the litigants was one for the mass disinterment of the bodies of all vaccinated people under 80 who died suddenly in the past two and a half years, so they could be subject to a specific type of autopsy.

The lawsuit is primarily aimed halting the vaccine programme for children aged five to 11-years-old.

The plaintiffs are also seeking a court order for the establishment of a commission of inquiry regarding use of the vaccine.

The lawsuit was initiated last year against the Taoiseach, the Health Minister and the HSE.

Ms Browne, of Garryowen, Co Limerick, describes herself in the pleadings as a mother, grandmother, homeowner and seamstress. Mr Egan, from Galway city, describes himself as a disability rights worker and a data analyst, while Mr Lavery, of Rear Cross, Co Tipperary, describes himself as a special needs assistant in a primary school.

While the plaintiffs do not dispute that the vaccine is provided purely on a voluntary basis, they claim parents have not given “informed” consent.

They claim this is because information on the vaccine provided by the European Medicines Agency, the National Immunisation Advisory Committee, the World Health Organisation, the HSE and other national and international expert bodies is untrue.

Mr Justice Twomey said no admissible evidence was provided to back up these claims.