The Supreme Court has confirmed a date of 23 May next to hear further submissions on an appeal by convicted murderer Patrick Quirke.
In March the court ruled the seizure and analysis of a computer from Mr Quirke's home - which formed a key part of the evidence against him - was unlawful.
It said it would hear further submissions from the prosecution and defence as to what should be the consequences of the ruling.
At a brief hearing, Ms Justice Elizabeth Dunne confirmed the court was ready to hear oral submissions on 23 May as scheduled after it received written submissions from the prosecution and defence legal teams.
In a hearing, which is expected to last less than a day, the court will hear arguments about the consequences which should flow from the ruling including the jurisdiction of the court to order a retrial or make a ruling on the evidence.
In March the seven-judge court gave a decision on part of the appeal by Co Tipperary farmer Patrick Quirke against his conviction for the murder in 2011 of Bobby Ryan.
The 52-year-old is serving a life sentence imposed after his conviction in 2019 for the murder of Mr Ryan, a DJ known as Mr Moonlight, following a 15-week trial.
He lost an appeal against his conviction but the Supreme Court heard a further appeal on two issues.
Mr Quirke's lawyers had argued before the Supreme Court that a search of his home in 2013, during which key prosecution evidence was seized, was unlawful because the warrant was invalid as it did not specify that computers were to be seized and analysed.
It ruled the analysis of the computer led to a "more significant intrusion" into the privacy rights of the accused than permitted.
The court said the law allowed for a search of a physical space and while a computer could be examined as a physical object for, as an example fingerprints, its use "as a portal into a virtual space" would have to be specified by gardaí when applying for a warrant.
The court said the warrant in this case made no reference to computers or digital devices or any potential reason for searching them.
The further intrusion into the digital space was not permitted because it was not authorised by the judge issuing the warrant and therefore was unlawful, it ruled.
Mr Justice Charleton said there was insufficient judicial analysis prior to the granting of the warrant and said this could have been obtained through a clear reference to computer devices and a statement as to why a digital search might be reasonably needed when the warrant application was made.
The trial in 2019 heard that Quirke murdered his love rival Mr Ryan so he could rekindle an affair with farm owner Mary Lowry.
Mr Ryan's remains were found in a disused underground tank on Ms Lowry’s farm almost two years after he went missing.
He had been in a relationship with Ms Lowry and was last seen alive as he left her home to go to work early on 3 June 2011.
The prosecution said Quirke staged the discovery of the body as he was about to give up his lease on the farm and feared he would be found out.
Quirke's appeal following the rejection of his case by the Court of Appeal.
The court agreed to hear the appeal because it involved matters of law of public importance.
