A legal attempt to quash the highly critical report of the Police Ombudsman, Ms Nuala O'Loan, into the RUC's handling of the Omagh bombing investigation cleared the first hurdle in the High Court in Belfast yesterday.
In granting leave for a judicial review, Mr Justice Kerr emphasised that his ruling was in no sense a forecast of the ultimate outcome of the proceedings and merely acknowledged that there was an arguable case.
The judge deferred an application by Mr Lawrence Rushe, whose wife Libby (57) was among the 29 victims of the "Real IRA" outrage in 1998, to become a notice party in the case.
Mr Justice Kerr told Mr Declan Morgan QC, for Mr Rushe, he could remain in court to observe the proceedings and if he wished could renew his application later.Outside the court, Mr Rushe said it was his intention to remain involved in the case "because my wife's murder is so important to me".
The judicial review has been brought by the Police Association, which represents all ranks in the PSNI.
The association's solicitors, Edwards and Co, said the decision of the three staff associations to link up and bring the case was unprecedented.
"The application is on behalf of the officers criticised in the Ombudsman's report who were given no right of reply," the company said.
Applying for leave, Mr Bernard McCloskey QC said the principal ground of challenge was procedural unfairness based of the affidavits of the Chief Constable, Sir Ronnie Flanagan, and the Assistant Chief Constable, Mr Raymond White.
He said the report contained significant condemnations of the judgment, skills and professional abilities of senior officers, including the Chief Constable, and factual errors and inaccuracies in the report meant it was severely contaminated.
Leave was opposed by Mr Brian Fee QC, for the Ombudsman, on the grounds of undue delay in bringing the case and also the standing of the Police Association. He argued the application should have been made by individual officers concerned.
Granting leave, Mr Justice Kerr said he was satisfied there was an arguable case that those affected by the report were not given sufficient opportunity to consider and respond to the allegations made against them.
He adjourned the hearing until April 22nd.