Woman without representation due to legal aid dispute released on bail after High Court challenge

At the High Court on Friday, lawyers submitted  that arising from the woman being unable to secure representation, she did not have a fair hearing at the district court. File picture

A woman who was left without legal representation in the district court due to a dispute over the new legal aid payment model has been released from custody on bail after she challenged her imprisonment in the High Court.

Ceiligh McCormack, aged 29, of Railway Street, Dublin 1, was unrepresented when she appeared before Dublin District Court this week due to many solicitors’ ongoing refusal to work under the revised scheme.

The scheme provides for a once-off legal aid fee of €520 irrespective of how many appearances solicitors make to represent a client in the district court. Previously, solicitors were paid per appearance.

Ms McCormack, who appeared in the district court on a charge of robbery, was remanded in custody after gardaí objected to bail.

At the High Court on Friday, lawyers for Ms McCormack submitted to Ms Justice Mary Rose Gearty that arising from her being unable to secure representation, Ms McCormack did not have a fair hearing at the district court.

The woman's counsel, Michael Lynn, appearing with Keith Spencer, moved a 'habeous corpus' application under Article 40 of the Constitution, challenging the legality of Ms McCormack’s detention. 

The judge agreed to open an inquiry into the lawfulness of the woman's detention.

Following discussions between the woman's legal team and the DPP team, bail terms for Ms McCormack were agreed. Her counsel said there was agreement that “contested issues” in the case could be dealt with next week.

In a sworn statement, Donal Quigley, a solicitor acting for Ms McCormack, submits that she was denied her constitutional right to a fair hearing in the district court, and her constitutional right to legal aid and representation.

He further submits that the new legal aid payment model impacted on Ms McCormack’s constitutional rights.

“By implementing a new system that has been rejected wholesale by lawyers, the State has failed to ensure that her right to be legally represented where faced with a serious criminal charge, has been protected and vindicated, resulting… in a breach of the Applicant’s constitutional rights,” Mr Quigley says.

He also claims that the new model of criminal legal aid payments is illegal, and conflicts with the provisions of the Criminal Justice (Legal Aid) Act 1962.

In a similar but separate application, Ms Justice Marguerite Bolger directed an inquiry into the lawfulness of the detention of Simon Whelan, who was remanded in custody this week after he appeared unrepresented at Dublin District Court.

Mr Whelan, aged 39, of Watergate Hostel, City Quay, Dublin 8, appeared in court this week charged with six offences — four burglary charges, one criminal damage charge, and one road traffic charge.

In an affidavit, Edward Bradbury, a solicitor representing Mr Whelan in the High Court, submitted that the new legal aid model led to Mr Whelan being “deprived… of legal advice and representation”.

He submits that Mr Whelan is now in prison following a bail hearing where he was “incapable of properly defending himself and making a case for bail”.

Ms Justice Bolger said the case could come back on Tuesday.