The High Court refused Joseph Lavery leave to pursue a judicial review after he was able to discharge a solicitor appointed to represent him in criminal proceedings and represent himself.
In an ex tempore judgment delivered on 21 December 2015, Mr Justice Richard Humphreys said Lavery had sought certiorari to quash a Cavan District Court order made on 5 November 2015. That order appointed legal aid solicitor Damian Rudden to represent him, although Lavery said he wanted to represent himself.
The application first came before the High Court ex parte. The judge directed that it be made on notice to the Director of Public Prosecutions. He temporarily stayed further substantive processing of the criminal proceedings while the leave application was considered, while allowing certain steps, including Lavery’s discharge of the appointed solicitor.
By the time of the judgment, Lavery had discharged Rudden and was representing himself. The judge described that as the central issue in the application. Given the limited relief sought and the change in circumstances, he concluded that granting leave would serve no further benefit. He refused leave; the judgment did not determine the underlying criminal proceedings.
Lavery also raised complaints about bench warrants and a local newspaper report that he had been dragged out of court. The judge said those complaints had not been developed enough to warrant leave. The DPP informed the court that a transcript of the digital audio recording for the requested date at Cavan Courthouse was unavailable. Lavery also complained that the DPP’s latest affidavits were unsworn, but the judge said sworn copies had been provided.
The judgment’s postscript records later procedural developments. On 11 April 2016, Lavery brought a second judicial review, alleging that the stay continued after leave was refused while his appeal was pending, and that the District Court therefore should not have fixed a hearing date for the criminal proceedings during that period. The judge directed that the DPP be put on notice and stayed further substantive processing of those proceedings for the time being. The second leave application was listed for hearing on notice on 9 May 2016.