The High Court refused a mother leave to seek judicial review of a Westport District Court order placing her daughter in the care of the Health Service Executive (HSE) until she turns 18. Mr Justice Hedigan delivered the decision on 7 December 2009.
The application concerned an order made on 22 October 2009 by District Judge Mary Devins. The mother, identified in the judgment as L. K., sought to have it quashed. She argued, among other things, that the District Court had decided the case before trial, had not properly considered her evidence, and had denied her the chance to call witnesses. She also challenged the HSE report and raised concerns about her daughter being placed with the child’s father, identified as D. A.
Those were the mother’s claims; the High Court was considering whether to grant leave for judicial review, not rehearing the underlying care case. The judgment recounts earlier District Court proceedings, including emergency and interim care orders, and says the mother had been directed to cooperate with the HSE and undergo a psychological assessment. She refused the assessment and continued to refuse cooperation, the judge said. The mother had appealed the 22 October order, and the appeal was due to be heard in the Circuit Court in January 2010.
Justice Hedigan said the October order appeared valid on its face and that no case had been made that it was invalid. He rejected the claim that the District Judge had decided the matter before the hearing. He said the order was prompted by the mother’s refusal to cooperate with an assessment intended to address concerns about her mental stability and her daughter’s safety. He stressed that the order was not made because the mother had been found to be mentally ill.
The judge also said the District Court had been entitled to decline to rely on medical reports from Latvia, whose origin and validity it could not assess, and to require an assessment by Irish medical professionals. He found the mother had had opportunities in earlier hearings to review social welfare reports and question relevant witnesses. He said there was no right to cross-examine the HSE’s solicitor.
The High Court considered that the Circuit Court appeal was the more appropriate way to challenge the order because the mother’s arguments were directed at a rehearing of the case’s merits. It therefore refused leave to seek judicial review. The judgment noted that the mother had not seen her daughter since 23 July 2009 and said efforts should be made to improve that situation immediately. It did not determine the merits of the Circuit Court appeal.