A survivor of the Stardust nightclub fire was left “aghast” after hearing that the Government intends to compensate people injured in the disaster with a flat fee of €20,000, limited to those who participated in a tribunal held in 1985, the High Court heard today.
Lawyers for Jimmy Fitzpatrick, who was 16 at the time of the fire and suffered catastrophic burns, said the decision came “out of the blue” following their client’s 40 years of campaigning for justice.
At the High Court on Monday, Judge Mary Rose Gearty granted leave to Fitzpatrick to seek a judicial review of the scheme. He wants the Government to engage with survivors before setting the parameters of the scheme.
In 2023, Fitzpatrick told the official inquiry into the disaster that he spent nearly four months in hospital having suffered “catastrophic” and “life-changing” third-degree burns to his arms, back, neck, shoulders and face.
READ MORE
He became upset as he told the tribunal about his friend, Liam Dunne (18), looking over the partition between their hospital beds and telling him: “Jimmy, we made it this far, we’ll get out and we’ll have a couple of pints.”
Dunne died a short time later from his injuries.
In April 2024, after 122 days of hearings, the inquest’s jury returned verdicts of unlawful killing in relation to the 48 people who died in the blaze. They found that the fire, which broke out on the night of February 14th, 1981, originated in a hot press as a result of an electrical fault.
The State apologised for decades of failures in recognising the suffering of survivors and the Government made a public commitment to a financial redress scheme, divided into two phases.
Phase one was for the 48 bereaved families, who received a flat payment of €500,000 each. Phase two was to be for the injured survivors, who were told that payments would be tailored to each person, avoiding a “flat” payment.
At the High Court on Monday, barrister Michael O’Higgins, with Katie Stevens, told Gearty that Fitzpatrick’s solicitors, Phoenix Law, had written to the Minister in July and September of last year requesting confirmation that engagement would commence with survivors’ representatives and that details of the implementation of this second phase would be established.
In the ex-parte application − where only one side is represented − lawyers submitted that in February 2026 the Minister announced what amounted to a “non-tiered payment of €20,000 for survivors, limited to those who had participated in the 1985 Tribunal”. Fitzpatrick’s lawyers said the scheme was being introduced “without any engagement or consultation” with survivors.
It is submitted that this decision “abandoned the promise of the second ‘exceptionality’ phase and imposed a new eligibility criterion, based solely on the 1985 tribunal participation, which many survivors then regarded as exclusionary and procedurally unsuitable”.
O’Higgins submitted to the judge the decision came “out of the blue, to say the least” and left his client − a campaigner for justice for more than 40 years − “aghast”.
Counsel said the Minister used “Jesuitical language” in response to requests from Phoenix Law as to how matters were proceeding.
O’Higgins is seeking a High Court declaration that the implementation of phase two without engaging with survivors is unlawful, contrary to fair procedures and in breach of the Constitution.
He further seeks a High Court order directing the Minister to reconsider the second phase of the payment programme through “meaningful engagement with survivors and their representatives and to publish a consultation framework and timelines, a draft scheme of parameters for ‘exceptionality’ and a lawful eligibility criteria for redress, not based solely upon participation in the 1985 tribunal.”
Fitzpatrick, of Swords, Co Dublin, has taken his case against the Office of the Minister for Justice and the Attorney General.
Having granted leave to O’Higgins, the judge adjourned the matter to November.
