High Court to decide if ‘unauthorised confession’ admissible against Dublin beautician

A beautician who denies unlawfully administering botox-like treatment to customers has claimed before the High Court that a State regulatory authority exceeded its powers and took an "unauthorised confession" from her during a search of her premises.

Anne Rossi, who runs the Anne Rossi Clinic at Vernon Avenue, Clontarf, Dublin, was prosecuted by the Health Products Regulatory Authority (HPRA) on 18 counts under the Irish Medicines Board Act.

The HPRA is the regulatory body for prescription medicines in Ireland.

At her District Court trial last year, Ms Rossi, a former psychiatric nurse, pleaded not guilty to all charges.

The District Judge referred a number of questions of law to the High Court and her trial remains on holding pending determination of those matters.

The case opened before Mr Justice Michael McGrath on Thursday.

The High Court is being asked to decide whether the alleged confession should be deemed admissible at her trial.

A further issue relates to a certificate required for analysis for the products.

The prosecution relates to a botox-like product, Dysport, which contains the prescription only substance Botulinum Toxin A. It is used in various treatments but is most popular for anti-wrinkle and anti-ageing signs effects.

It is alleged three women customers of the clinic received injections of the product from Ms Rossi in 2014/15 when there was no doctor or pharmacist present as required by law.

Conleth Bradley SC, for Ms Rossi, said it was their case there was a failure by the HPRA inspector, who interviewed her during a search at her clinic on February 19th 2016, to adhere to the statutory regime for prosecutors as required under the Irish Medicines Board (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2006.

Although Ms Rossi was cautioned by the inspector, an unauthorised confession was taken from her because of a failure to advise her of her right to a solicitor, counsel said.

The requirement to do so was mandatory under the terms of the 2006 Act, he said. The HPRA disputes the claim. The case continues.