The Supreme Court has refused to grant leave to appeal against a decision of the Court of Appeal dismissing two separate challenges to the same-sex marriage referendum.
In July, the Court of Appeal dismissed the applications for permission to bring petitions challenging the result of the 22 May poll.
Today, the Supreme Court ruled that the Constitutional threshold for leave to appeal had not been met and there was no substance to the points raised.
The court said: "It would not be necessary in the interests of justice that there be an appeal to the Supreme Court."
It also noted that because no stay was placed on the certificate of the referendum result after the Court of Appeal decision, "very serious constitutional consequences" might have occurred had it decided to grant leave to appeal.
The court said it highlighted the need for those seeking leave to appeal to address the question of a stay in the lower court.
It added: "Also relevant is the respect due to the legal process by other organs of the State.
"In the event, in this case there was no adverse consequence.
"However, in another situation very serious constitutional consequences might have occurred had this court considered it appropriate to grant leave on any grounds when the certificate had become final and the Constitution amended."
Two separate cases challenging the result of the referendum were brought by Gerry Walshe, an electrician, of Lisdeen, Co Clare, and Maurice J Lyons, a gardener, of Callan, Co Kilkenny.
It had been argued that a Supreme Court appeal was warranted because the case was of national public importance as it related to a challenge to the validity of the marriage referendum.
It had been claimed that the State's use of its organs and resources to promote a particular outcome in relation to the marriage referendum was unconstitutional.