The High Court refused to order an inquiry into the legality of Séamus Marley’s detention at Midlands Prison, finding that his complaint about access to his solicitor did not meet the threshold for immediate release under Article 40 of the Constitution.
In a ruling dated 18 February 2022, Mr Justice David Holland said Marley alleged that prison authorities had delayed legal letters and failed to facilitate consultations with his solicitor about pending Court of Appeal and High Court proceedings. The judge accepted Marley’s unsworn complaint as if sworn for the purposes of the application, given his stated difficulty accessing his solicitor.
The ruling records that Marley’s solicitors complained in letters dated 14 and 24 January 2022 about delays in receiving correspondence, unanswered requests for visits, and a video consultation that was repeatedly rescheduled. The judge said that, assuming the allegations were accurate, Marley may have been deprived for more than 10 days of access to his solicitor for matters in which he had a direct interest. He described that view as provisional, based on an ex parte application and incomplete information.
Holland said Marley had not asserted that a hearing was imminent or that the inability to consult had substantially disadvantaged his proceedings. He also noted that Marley was not challenging his 2019 conviction or the original legal basis for his detention in this application. The court concluded that the alleged breaches did not amount to the fundamental flaw or denial of justice required to make detention unlawful under Article 40.
The judge refused the Article 40 inquiry but treated the application as one for judicial review, including a possible order requiring the prison governor to facilitate consultation with Marley’s solicitor. He did not grant leave for judicial review at this stage, saying the papers were too limited for an informed decision.
The judge deemed the leave application to have been made on 14 February 2022 for time-limit purposes. He gave Marley two weeks from receiving the ruling to file grounds and a supporting affidavit, and directed the governor to file a responding affidavit within two weeks of receiving it. The leave application is to be heard initially on the papers, with the matter adjourned sine die pending further material. No order requiring a solicitor visit or consultation was made in the ruling.