B. -v- Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse, [2007] IEHC 376 (2007)

Docket Number:2006 1472 JR
Party Name:B., Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse
Judge:O''Neill J.

Neutral Citation Number: [2007] IEHC 376THE HIGH COURTJUDICIAL REVIEW [2006 No. 1472 J.R.]BETWEENM.BAPPLICANT ANDTHE COMMISSION TO INQUIRE INTO CHILD ABUSE RESPONDENT ANDTHE RESIDENTIAL INSTITUTIONS REDRESS BOARDNOTICE PARTY JUDGMENT of O'Neill J. delivered on the 7th day of November 2007 In this application the applicant seeks leave pursuant to s. 26(a) of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse Act, 2002 as inserted by s. 19 of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse (Amendment) Act, 2005, to seek by way of judicial review an order of certiorari quashing the decision of the respondent communicated by letter of the 21st February, 2006 to refuse to make available to the applicant or to the notice party any records in the possession of the notice party of evidence given by the applicant's late husband J.B. to the confidential committee of the respondents.In addition as this application was brought later than two months from the date of the decision challenged, the applicant seeks an order pursuant to s. 19(3) of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse (Amendment) Act, 2005, extending the period of two months for the purpose of bringing this application.The background to this matter is as follows.The applicant's late husband J.B. was born in 1935. The applicant and her late husband were married in 1973 and J.B. died on the 14th July, 2005. The late J.B. was a native of Ireland but emigrated to the United Kingdom in the early 1950s and lived and worked there until the end of his life.In or about the month of June 2001, the applicant became aware through material he discovered in his local library of the existence and function of the respondent. At that time the late Mr. B. disclosed to the applicant that he had suffered abuse while in a residential institution in Ireland between 1945 and 1951. The late Mr. B. corresponded with the respondents and arrangements were made for him to give evidence to the respondent. The applicant and the late Mr. B. travelled over to Dublin in early December 2001 and stayed in a hotel in Dublin for two nights. He attended before the Confidential Committee of the respondents and gave his evidence.The late Mr. B. did not at that stage, or at any stage, disclose to the applicant any detail whatever of the abuse suffered. Neither did he furnish any detail of this to any professionals, such as a solicitor who appeared to have acted for him in 2001. The late Mr. B. never attended any psychiatrists or counsellors. The applicant avers that at all times from June 2001 onwards, the late Mr. B. believed that his approach and application to the respondents would result in an award of compensation to him. She avers he was not aware of the existence of the notice party or of the separate functions of the respondent and the notice party. She avers that when the applicant came to Dublin in December 2001 and was met by an officer of the respondents and escorted from his hotel to the respondent's offices and back, that he was assured that there would be an award of compensation to him. After the giving of his evidence to the Confidential Committee, the applicant avers that the late Mr. B. continued to await an award of compensation and as time went on he remarked occasionally on the delay in receiving his award. The applicant avers that the late Mr. B. firmly believed that he had nothing further to do and no further application to make, beyond that which he had made to the respondents, in order to obtain the compensation. As his health declined and as he neared death, she avers that he express the wish that she would receive the compensation to be...

To continue reading