The Supreme Court has rejected Michael O’Callaghan’s request to remit damages issues to the High Court and awarded him the full costs of his Supreme Court appeal, plus 45% of his High Court and Court of Appeal costs.
In a ruling delivered on 8 October 2021, the Court addressed matters arising from its 30 September judgment. That judgment held that O’Callaghan was entitled to a declaration that his constitutional right to a trial with due expedition under Article 38 had been infringed. It marked the violation with an award of €5,000.
The Court said any damages had to be tied to the delay beyond what would have been reasonable for the appeal to be heard. It emphasised that O’Callaghan’s detention had been lawful and that the case did not involve a breach of his constitutional right to liberty. His earlier claims for damages arising from miscarriage of justice and under the European Convention on Human Rights had been rejected or were time-barred, the ruling said.
O’Callaghan submitted that the parties had agreed at the start of the High Court proceedings that damages would be assessed there if liability were established. The Supreme Court said that alleged agreement had not been disclosed in the application for leave or written submissions, and that the application’s wording had been misleading. The Court said the proposed damages claims concerned detention conditions and alleged effects on his livelihood, health, private and family life, relationships, and distress, loss and expense. It considered those matters outside the damages that could flow from the identified delay violation.
The Court also cited the prospect of further appeals and delay in proceedings that began in February 2015. It rejected the remittal application, describing it as unnecessary given the limits of the available damages award.
On costs, the Court retained the allocation made in the Court of Appeal: 45% for the delay and fair-trial issue, 45% for miscarriage of justice, and 10% for the ECHR cross-appeal. As O’Callaghan had not succeeded on the latter two issues, the Supreme Court awarded him full costs of the appeal to that Court and 45% of the High Court and Court of Appeal hearings.