The Supreme Court judgment of Mr Justice John MacMenamin would uphold the Court of Appeal’s decision to reject a prisoner’s negligence claim, but proposes a declaration that the Irish Prison Service complaints policy introduced in 2014 did not provide an effective complaints system in his case.
The appellant, identified in the judgment as McD, had been serving a 12-year sentence in X Prison. In February 2015, while held in voluntary isolation, he began a hunger strike over changes to his exercise arrangements and how food was delivered to his cell. He submitted two written complaints on 9 and 10 February, following the Governor’s advice to use the complaints process. The complaints were not categorised until 25 February and were answered on 27 March.
The High Court found the complaints system was poorly resourced and not functioning properly. It awarded McD €5,000 in negligence damages, finding that the delay contributed to the continuation and escalation of his hunger strike. It also declared that the Governor had breached the complaints policy. The Court of Appeal set aside both orders in July 2020.
In the Supreme Court, MacMenamin J. concluded that the negligence claim could not succeed. He said the evidence showed the hunger strike was caused by the Governor’s refusal to meet McD’s demands, rather than the delay in answering the complaints. An earlier response would not have changed the outcome, he said, and there was no evidence that the alleged negligence caused identifiable injury. He also considered McD’s decision to hunger strike an autonomous one, and found no basis for imposing the claimed duty of care on the Governor.
The proposed declaration is different from the one originally sought. It would state that the administration of the 2014 Irish Prison Service Complaints Policy did not comply with the requirement to provide an effective complaints system in McD’s case. MacMenamin J. said the evidence showed the system was not functional and that an effective, confidential complaints procedure was important to prison administration and prisoners’ rights.
The judgment records that McD died while the appeal was pending. It states that the appeal concerned only negligence and declaratory relief; he had not appealed the dismissal of most of his constitutional and Convention claims. The supplied judgment is MacMenamin J.’s judgment and concludes by setting out his proposed disposition.