The High Court has dismissed proceedings brought by Kevin and Karen Tracy after ruling that the evidence presented at trial did not establish a prima facie case on any of the claims pursued.
The order followed applications by defendants at the conclusion of the plaintiffs’ evidence to withdraw the case from the jury and dismiss the action. The Tracys, who were unrepresented, opposed the applications. The court said it had considered submissions from the parties.
The judgment, delivered by Mr Justice Bernard J. Barton on 20 July 2018, concerned multiple tort claims tried before a jury. The judge said the question was whether, assuming no further evidence was given, a jury could reasonably return a verdict for the plaintiffs if it accepted their evidence. The court was not deciding the claims after a full defence case: the applications were made before the defendants’ evidence. Some defendants had indicated they would not call evidence if their applications failed; the Courts Service defendants said they would call evidence only to prove a document.
A central dispute concerned an alleged assault at the Tracys’ home when three Garda defendants arrived to execute a warrant for the arrest and detention of Kevin Tracy in Mountjoy Prison. Karen Tracy testified that he was pushed to the ground, handcuffed and stood on. The Gardaí testified that they did not touch him, accepted his explanation and left without executing the warrant.
The judge said factual conflicts would ordinarily be for the jury to resolve. However, he concluded that Karen Tracy’s account lacked real credibility because there was no evidence that the alleged assault had been mentioned during a later conversation with Inspector Keenan or in subsequent correspondence about complaints he had been appointed to investigate. Keenan had visited the home and apologised for errors that had led to Kevin Tracy’s prosecution and conviction for failing to produce his driving licence and insurance, although he had produced them. The judgment said that point was not in issue.
Having considered the evidence against the legal elements of each claim pursued at trial, the judge found a jury properly directed on the law could not reasonably find for the plaintiffs on any of them. He therefore granted the applications, withdrew the case from the jury and dismissed the proceedings. The judgment records that the first trial had collapsed; it does not state the outcome of any appeal or later proceedings.