Ms A and the judge: Judge accused of seeking romantic relationship

Ms A is claiming damages for breaches of her rights under data protection legislation, the right to a fair trial, the right to privacy and for misfeasance in public office. Picture: iStock

The matter of what may have transpired between Ms A and the judge has been examined in various forums. 

Ms A has claimed she was pursued by the judge, who got her number in the course of a family law matter and met and texted her afterwards on occasions with a view to pursuing “an inappropriate romantic relationship”.

An Garda Síochána has examined the matter and concluded that nothing of a criminal nature arises. Gsoc has examined it and concluded gardaí did not act wrongly in investigating the matter. 

It was not examined in any forum charged with investigating alleged judicial misbehaviour simply because the judicial council’s conduct committee is not yet up and running. Now, the matter is the subject of a personal injuries claim from Ms A, a separated mother-of-two, against the State.

Her claims are set out in statements provided for the gardaí, Gsoc and in the initial letter claiming damages. 

Hearing for barring order

In late 2016, she and her estranged husband appeared before the judge in a hearing for a barring order. Ms A claimed her husband had assaulted her. During the proceedings, the judge, Ms A claims, asked for the phone numbers of both her and her husband. An interim barring order was granted.

Later in the day, she had a missed call and phoned back. When he answered, the judge identified himself by his first name and being “from the court”. Then she realised she was talking to the judge.

“I was then getting stressed out,” she said in a statement. “I asked was something wrong with the case should I go back. The man replied ‘no everything is good with the case. I just wanted to talk to you’, 

"He said, ‘you looked very beautiful today’. I said ‘Ok’. He then said, ‘no, no really.’ At this point, I asked is this a prank call. 

"He said, ‘no, no I just rang'.”

The following month, the judge phoned again, she said. She told him she was going on holiday. 

She and her children had a holiday in Fuerteventura during which, she said, he texted again.

A few days after returning from holidays, she received another phone call from the judge. 

“He asked were we back from holidays and said my skin must look nice now,” Ms A related in her statement. 

"I didn’t reply, just ignored but now it was weird. I was still thinking there must be something he wanted to tell me. He said, ‘let’s meet up for the coffee'.”

The judge, she claims, asked where she lived. She told him the general area and the road. 

“He said, ‘oh yes I know the houses there, give me the house number’. I said no, well, actually, I said this address is on the same case file as you got this number. He was laughing. I wasn’t laughing.”

Met for coffee

She didn’t want him coming to her house so she agreed to meet him for coffee. They met, she said, in a pub near the courthouse during the judge’s lunch break.

“We were having general conversation. I was thinking he was going to give me some important information but then I realised it was not to give me legal advice,” her statement reads. 

I knew by his body language that he had not met me to talk about the case, it was for something to pursue romantically. I wasn’t interested in that.”

Some weeks later, in February 2017, she got another call from the judge. asking would she meet close to where he had a court sitting. She claims she said she couldn’t, that she was busy. This was the last contact between them.

In April 2017, Ms A appeared before the judge again for an extension of the barring order. She didn’t tell her legal team about the encounters and contacts with the judge.

“I didn’t tell them that the reason for it was because I didn’t like the judge’s attention towards me and didn’t want to be in front of him in a vulnerable position. 

I didn’t tell them so they couldn’t understand why I wasn’t happy with the rolling order. I started crying over the protection order and said I was afraid of my husband because I couldn’t say I was afraid of the judge.”

The barring order was continued. Ms A made a complaint to the gardaí in 2018 but no prosecution resulted. She claims one of the investigating gardaí told her it was a “boy meets girl” thing. 

She complained to GSoc, which investigated the issue as a priority Category A complaint and ultimately determined the gardaí had not acted inappropriately.

The judge is no longer serving on the bench. Ms A is claiming damages for breaches of her rights under data protection legislation, the right to a fair trial, the right to privacy and for misfeasance in public office.