Judge refuses to opt out of ‘Phoenix’ contempt case
Mr Bailey lost his action for damages against the Garda commissioner and State earlier this year.
Prior to the opening of Mr Bailey’s action, the Garda commissioner and State initiated proceedings last October against Penfield Enterprises, publisher of The Phoenix, over an article published on September 26 last. They have also alleged contempt in a second article published in April, after the trial had concluded.
It is alleged both articles were in contempt of court proceedings. The Phoenix denies any contempt and contends the State is seeking “draconian” reliefs.
Mr Justice John Hedigan was the judge for Mr Bailey’s action and case managed it prior to hearing. When the contempt matters came before the judge yesterday, Robert Dore, solicitor for Penfield Enterprises, said his clients, while wishing no disrespect to the judge, wished him not to hear the contempt proceedings. The recusal application arose from comments made previously by the judge, including a remark the September 2014 article was reckless and irresponsible and calculated to prejudice the progress of the trial, Mr Dore said.
Paul O’Higgins, for the Commissioner and State, said his side’s view was Mr Justice Hedigan was best placed to deal with the contempt matter. The State’s case is there was a very deliberate attempt to try and interfere with the course of the Bailey proceedings, counsel said.
Mr Justice Hedigan said while he was not at all offended by the recusal application, no grounds had been established justifying his recusal.
The contempt claims mainly centred on legal issues and there was no dispute concerning publication, he said. He was the judge most familiar with the matters at issue and would deal with the contempt matter. After Mr Dore asked for an adjournment, the judge fixed the matter for hearing next week.
CONNECT WITH US TODAY
Be the first to know the latest news and updates
