The High Court has upheld the Legal Aid Board’s decision to withdraw legal aid from Christopher Prendergast for proposed litigation seeking to revisit findings made after a 1986 fire at a Carlow knitwear factory.
The factory was owned by W.J. Prendergast & Son Ltd, in which Prendergast was a shareholder. After the fire, the company sought compensation under the Malicious Injuries Act 1981. In 1988, the High Court rejected that claim because it was not satisfied that a malicious intruder had caused the fire.
Prendergast argued decades later that the judgment effectively implicated him in arson without the protections of a criminal trial. He applied for legal aid in 2019 to challenge the earlier findings. The Legal Aid Board initially granted a certificate but later terminated it after counsel advised that evidence capable of establishing fraud or perjury by an expert witness had not been identified.
Ms Justice Gearty rejected Prendergast’s characterisation of the 1988 proceedings as a criminal case. They were civil compensation proceedings, she held, and resulted in no criminal finding, conviction or penalty against him.
The court also found that the Board had given adequate reasons. Its April 2023 decision identified the lack of evidence of fraud, possible res judicata and abuse-of-process issues, limitation and delay problems, the risk of an adverse costs order and the limited prospects of obtaining any benefit from the proposed litigation.
A further practical obstacle was the passage of time. Prendergast had not personally challenged the 1988 findings for more than 30 years, despite knowing the case and having given evidence in it. The court held that any proposed action would face an overwhelming procedural difficulty from that delay.
The High Court also rejected arguments based on EU law, the European Convention on Human Rights and section 28(5) of the Civil Legal Aid Act 1995. The judicial review application was refused in full.