The judge in the Gerry Adams civil case had made “extraordinary” and “unnecessary” interventions that forced Adams’s accusers thousands of pounds of costs, their lawyers have argued.
In an unusual commentary after defeat, McCue Jury solicitors were clearly furious about the actions taken by Justice Jonathan Swift in the nine-day-long high court case in London.
“This outcome is not of the claimants’ making. It follows an extraordinary and, in our clients’ view, unnecessary late intervention by the court,” they said, saying that they had acted “for brave survivors of Provisional IRA terrorism”.
The judge had repeatedly raised questions over whether the case was an abuse of process on the grounds that a personal injuries claim was being used to make wider points about The Troubles.
READ MORE
However, McCue Jury said: “For four years, this case proceeded on the clear basis that this was a legitimate action; there was no allegation of abuse of process against the Claimants until yesterday morning.”
The issue of abuse of process was “expressly disavowed” by Justice Michael Soole, who had dealt with the earlier chapters of the case which has been on the books in London for nearly four years.
Soole had granted a costs protection order in favour of the claimants, which mean that they would not be liable for Adams’s costs if they lost in a full hearing of the case.
However, this protection had been put in jeopardy by Swift, since it was inevitable that the costs order would have to be reopened if he found that the case had been an abuse of process from the beginning.
Adams’s legal team “wrongly and repeatedly implied” that the three had used the case to establish if Adams had been a senior IRA man, rather than seeking to establish his personal involvement in their bombings where they were injured.
The three men, Jonathan Ganesh, Barry Laycock and John Clark, had sought £1 in vindicatory damages from Adams on the grounds that he was an IRA member and that he had ordered bombings in England in the 1970s and 1990s.
“They did this not for financial gain, but for personal vindication and the truth. They believe he was responsible for the bombings because he held a leadership role in the IRA and should answer for that,” said the solicitors.
For the first time, he had been brought before an English court and compelled to give evidence and face cross-examination, they said, adding that “a substantial body of evidence” about his alleged IRA involvement is now on the public record.
Adams denies any involvement in the bombings and has repeatedly denied he was ever in the IRA or on its army council.
“They are proud of what they have achieved – not only for themselves, but for other victims of Provisional IRA violence. They consider this a significant and legitimate attempt towards establishing the truth about The Troubles,” McCue Jury went on.
Vulnerable victims of terrorism could have “faced devastating personal liability for legal costs”, they said, arguing that was a risk that Adams inevitably exploited – even though the abuse of process issue had been sorted two years ago.
