Butterly v Cullinane

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Mr. Justice Charles Meenan
• Judgment Date: 02 November 2022
• Neutral Citation: [2022] IEHC 597
• Court: High Court
• Docket Number: [2022 156 JR]

Between

Eamonn Butterly

Applicant

and

Myra Cullinane, Coroner for the Dublin District, The Minister for Justice, Ireland, and The Attorney General

Respondents

and

The Families of the 47 Deceased Represented before the Stardust Inquest by Phoenix Law, Patricia Kennedy (Mother of Marie Kennedy), The Commissioner of an Garda Síochána and Dublin City Council

Notice Parties

[2022] IEHC 597

[2022 156 JR]

THE HIGH COURT

JUDICIAL REVIEW

JUDGMENT of Mr. Justice Charles Meenan delivered on the 2 ^nd day of November, 2022

Introduction

1 . I refer to my judgment of today's date where I consider whether or not and in what circumstances a verdict of unlawful killing is available in the forthcoming inquests into those who died in the Stardust tragedy on 14 ^th February 1981. Another issue that fell to be determined was the applicant's entitlement to costs under the Coroners Acts, 1962 – 2020 (The Coroners Acts) or otherwise at law.

2 . The legal representatives of the families (the notice parties) applied under s. 60 of the Coroners Acts for free legal aid. The provisions of s. 60 enable the coroner to make such an order.

3 . The applicant has been named as an “interested party” by the first named respondent (the Coroner) at the forthcoming inquests. It is anticipated that the hearing of these inquests will be both lengthy and detailed requiring the presence of the applicant, through his legal advisors.

Judicial Review

4 . The applicant has sought the following reliefs on the issue of costs:

“In the alternative, if a finding or verdict of unlawful killing is available, or investigation or consideration of evidence exclusively related to the blame to be attached to particular persons is admissible, in the Stardust fire inquests:

• (i) A declaration that the failure to make any provision for the applicant to apply for legal aid to participate in the Stardust fire inquests or to apply for his costs of participating in the said inquests constitutes a failure on the part of the respondents to conduct the said inquests in accordance with their procedures, and/or a breach of natural and constitutional justice, and/or a failure to vindicate the applicant's rights under the Constitution, including his right to his good name and his right to fair procedures.

• (ii) A declaration that the provisions of the Constitution require any inquest under the Coroners Acts, 1962 – 2020 to be conducted in accordance with fair procedures and natural and constitutional justice and that require that an interested person, including the applicant, must have some means by which he or she may apply for legal aid to participate in the Stardust fire inquests or to seek to recover his costs of participating in the said inquest after its conclusion.

• (iii) A declaration that, insofar as the provisions of the Coroners Acts, 1962 – 2020 do not provide any mechanism through which the applicant may apply for legal aid to participate in the Stardust fire inquests or to apply for its costs of participating in the inquests, the said Acts are invalid having...