The Court of Appeal has dismissed Carol Collins’s proceedings against the Minister for Justice, Ireland and the Attorney General, after finding that prolonged delays made it significantly harder for the defendants to defend part of her claim and that a fair trial could no longer be assured.
The judgment, delivered on 19 February 2015 by Ms Justice Mary Irvine, allowed the defendants’ appeal from a High Court decision refusing to dismiss the case. The appeal concerned the defendants’ second application to dismiss the proceedings for inordinate and inexcusable delay. The Court of Appeal reconsidered the evidence, gave weight to the High Court judge’s conclusions, and decided the case should be dismissed.
Collins’s 2003 proceedings alleged that members of An Garda Síochána mistreated her between 1998 and 2001, including unlawful arrests and searches. She also alleged that, while in Garda custody in November 2000, she was subjected to an unlawful and negligently conducted internal examination by Dr James Maloney, causing bleeding and requiring medical treatment. These were allegations in her claim; the defendants denied wrongdoing.
The court said the case had not been advanced with expedition. A previous application resulted in an order dismissing the claim, stayed on condition that a statement of claim with full particulars be delivered by 21 January 2010. The judge had found the earlier delay both inordinate and inexcusable and directed Collins to proceed expeditiously. The statement was delivered on that date, but the Court of Appeal identified further substantial delays, including a lengthy wait to reply to a request for particulars and to serve notice of trial. After notice of trial was struck out when no one attended the list to fix dates, no step was taken to obtain a trial date before the defendants’ second dismissal application in May 2012.
Collins’s solicitor attributed the later delay in part to a misunderstanding of the procedure for obtaining a jury trial date. The appeal court held that this did not adequately explain the inactivity, including the period before the notice was struck out. It concluded that the overall delay was inordinate and inexcusable.
The court also found significant prejudice to the defence of the claims concerning the November 2000 examination because Dr Maloney had died in 2007. It rejected the argument that another doctor, who arrived hours after the examination, could give evidence about how it was performed or whether Collins consented. The court said the defendants had not acquiesced in the delay.
Recognising the seriousness of the allegations and the public interest in their determination, the court nevertheless concluded that the defendants’ prejudice and the risk that a fair trial could not be assured outweighed the case proceeding. It allowed the appeal and dismissed the proceedings.