Ian Bailey’s partner to sue despite verdict
Ms Thomas is claiming High Court damages for wrongful arrest on two occasions by gardaí investigating the murder of Sophie Toscan du Plantier.
The Welsh-born artist was first arrested along with Mr Bailey in February 1997, two months after Ms du Plantier’s death, and a second time in September 2000 when she was told she was suspected of covering up Mr Bailey’s alleged involvement in the murder.
She has never been charged and claims her arrests were unjustified, that they were designed purely to unnerve her partner and caused her enormous stress.
Her solicitor, Frank Buttimer, who also represented Mr Bailey, confirmed yesterday she was not deterred by the outcome of her partner’s proceedings. “We are ready to proceed with her case as soon as a hearing date is set.”
Ms Thomas’s case was among a number of civil jury trials mentioned in court late last week prior to the resumption of Mr Bailey’s hearing. All were adjourned for several months to fix dates for hearing.
It is thought likely to be scheduled for hearing late this year or early next year and, in a bizarre twist, is expected to be on the list of Mr Justice John Hedigan, who also heard Mr Bailey’s case, as he is the designated judge for civil jury trials.
Ms Thomas has already appeared in court before Mr Justice Hedigan as a witness in Mr Bailey’s case where she testified over several days, and Mr Bailey could be called a witness in her case, but it is not clear if this would have any bearing on the judge’s position.
It is expected her hearing could be completed within a fortnight, in contrast with Mr Bailey’s case, which ran on 64 days over a four-and-a-half month period before it concluded on Monday with the jury deciding against his claim that gardaí had conspired to frame him for Ms du Plantier’s murder by influencing a key witness’s statements.
The jury had not been allowed to deliberate on Mr Bailey’s claim for wrongful arrest after Mr Justice Hedigan granted an application by the State late in the hearing to have it struck out on the grounds that Mr Bailey had waited too long to lodge his complaint.
Mr Bailey now faces a battle to limit the legal costs expected to be awarded against him. Estimates put the cost of the case at €5m but lawyers have suggested the State’s failure to raise objections to the wrongful arrest element of Mr Bailey’s claim at the outset of the trial unnecessarily prolonged the hearing and increased the costs.
Litigation expert Tony Williams said that even legal professionals had been surprised by the turn of events towards the end of the case.
“It was an extraordinary victory on behalf of the State. Mr Bailey had many, many heads of claims and in the end was just left with one. This may have ramifications during the costs phase of the case which will be the next thing coming up,” he said.
“Usually the winner wins his costs but I’m sure the Bailey team will make some class of an argument that there may have been wasted costs, that this application could have been made earlier.”
Mr Buttimer would not comment on the costs issue, which will next be mentioned in court on April 13, and he would give no indication of whether an appeal against the outcome of Mr Bailey’s case was likely.
An appeal would have to be heard in the Supreme Court and would be limited to points of law rather than a review of the extensive evidence heard in the High Court, so it could be presented over the course of a few days.
It is expected a decision on an appeal will be made once there is a greater degree of clarity over the costs issue.
CONNECT WITH US TODAY
Be the first to know the latest news and updates
