Court dismisses claim against judge

The High Court has dismissed a claim for damages by a private investigator against a District Judge; the Minister for Justice…

The High Court has dismissed a claim for damages by a private investigator against a District Judge; the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform; the Garda Commissioner; the State; and the Letterkenny District Court Clerk Valentine Cronin.

Mr William Flynn, of Rathcore, Enfield, Co Meath, who claims to have exposed Garda corruption in Co Donegal, had brought claims arising out of the handling of criminal proceedings against him which were brought before District Judge Mr Michael Connellan in Letterkenny Court in 1998.

The defendants denied the claims, pleaded the actions against them showed no cause of action and were scandalous and vexatious and applied to have them dismissed for those reasons.

In a reserved judgment yesterday, Mr Justice Ó Caoimh granted the motion to dismiss Mr Flynn's claims.

READ MORE

The judge said Mr Flynn had claimed he was suffering from illness and was unable to attend a hearing in Letterkenny District Court on April 22nd, 1998. Out of respect for the court, he told solicitors and counsel on April 20th, 1998, to inform the court he would be unable to attend and claimed his situation was supported by medical certificates.

Mr Flynn had claimed that Judge Connellan refused an application on April 21st to adjourn the hearing for six months and that, out of malice and spite, the judge had disregarded the medical evidence and adjourned the matter peremptorily to May 28th, 1998.

It was also claimed that Judge Connellan slandered Mr Flynn and had issued negligent mis-statements and malicious falsehoods concerning Mr Flynn's illness, his character and reputation. Mr Flynn alleged Judge Connellan had instructed the Chief State Solicitor to bring an application to have proceedings taken by Mr Flynn struck out.

Dismissing Mr Flynn's action, Mr Justice Ó Caoimh said he was satisfied the central issue was whether a District Judge enjoyed privilege from being sued in the course of his acting in judicial proceedings. He was satisfied that as the District Court was a court of record, then Judge Connellan enjoyed privilege from being sued in respect of words and actions in the course of acting in his judicial capacity and that this privilege extended to any allegation of malice.