The Court of Appeal has dismissed a Dublin woman's challenge against the abortion referendum result.

Joanna Jordan, from Dun Laoghaire, Co Dublin, had appealed last month's ruling by High Court President Mr Justice Peter Kelly that Ms Jordan had failed to meet the necessary legal test set by the Referendum Act before a court could permit a petition to be brought.

In a decision handed down yesterday, the Court of Appeal - comprising its President Mr Justice George Birmingham, Ms Justice Mary Irvine and Mr Justice Gerard Hogan - found that Judge Kelly was "entirely correct in refusing leave to Ms Jordan to present the petition".

Mr Justice Birmingham said the court would go even further than the High Court ruling and held that Ms Jordan's presentation, based as it was on flimsy and slender grounds, amounted to a frustration of the democratic process in relation to referenda and might in other circumstances amount to an abuse of process.

In her appeal Ms Jordan, of Upper Glenageary Road, Dun Laoghaire, alleged there had been irregularities in the conduct of the referendum and registration of voters.

She also complained about statements made by Taoiseach Leo Varadkar and Health Minister Simon Harris during the referendum campaign.

Her appeal against the High Court's decision was opposed by the State.

Giving the court's decision, Mr Justice Birmingham said Government ministers were perfectly free to campaign as they saw fit.

It was not a breach of the Government's duty to uphold the Constitution by campaigning for change, since a mechanism for constitutional change was itself provided for in the Constitution, the judge added.

Handful

He said Ms Jordan had not advanced any sustainable argument or evidence to demonstrate that the effect of any supposed irregularities in relation to the Electoral Register could possibly have affected the result.

Even taking her claims to their absolute height, and making every possible allowance in her favour, all that could be shown was that at most a handful of votes had been affected.

The court agreed with Mr Justice Kelly's "considerably restrained comments" that much of what Ms Jordan claimed in regard to irregularities with the Electoral Register were general assertions, speculation or inadmissible hearsay.

Her claims included that people entitled to vote did not get polling cards, potential no voters were deregistered, and that thousands of young Irish people who were paid to return to vote were not questioned at the polling stations about their time of residency abroad.

Mr Justice Birmingham said the Court of Appeal would go further to say Ms Jordan's assertions were "so entirely devoid of substance that we can only conclude they were made with reckless and irresponsible abandon".

After dismissing the appeal, the court placed a stay on its decision pending an appeal to the Supreme Court until Friday of this week. It is understood Ms Jordan intends to appeal.

The court also said that Ms Jordan must pay the legal costs incurred by the State for contesting the appeal.