Courts

Inland Fisheries Ireland must return €10,000 to contractor after last-minute withdrawal of prosecution

Fisheries watchdog had prosecuted three contractors hired by Office of Public Works over a fish kill

Inland Fisheries Ireland initially prosecuted three contractors hired by the Office of Public Works for the Bandon flood relief scheme in Co Cork over a fish kill. File photograph: Alan Betson/The Irish Times
Inland Fisheries Ireland initially prosecuted three contractors hired by the Office of Public Works for the Bandon flood relief scheme in Co Cork over a fish kill. File photograph: Alan Betson/The Irish Times
Noel Baker
Fri Apr 26 2024 - 19:45

Inland Fisheries Ireland (IFI) must return €10,000 to a contractor and faces a significant bill for costs after a “systems error” meant it had to withdraw a long-running court prosecution at the eleventh hour.

The fisheries watchdog had initially prosecuted three contractors hired by the Office of Public Works for the Bandon flood relief scheme in Co Cork over a fish kill.

Two of the contractors – Byrne Looby Partners Water Services Ltd, and Rivus Ltd – were subsequently acquitted, while Judge Mary Dorgan had found the case against Wills Bros to be proven. The judge had then suggested a restorative justice approach to the case, including the provision of €10,000 to Inland Fisheries Ireland to boost river habitats.

However, as the matter returned before Bandon District Court to check on the status of those restorative works, the IFI said it would have to withdraw the prosecution and ask for a nolle prosequi.

READ SOME MORE

Solicitor for the IFI, Vincent Coakley, said this was due to “internal difficulties” within the IFI board.

Later elaborating on what he said was a “sensitive issue”, Mr Coakley said: “The board of the IFI was given powers to prosecute and to delegate that power to individuals.”

He said “the difficulty that has arisen is there were individuals in the board who direct delegation of those powers” and that there had been “no formal written” powers of prosecution given to those individuals, adding that while this had been given verbally, it was not written down.

“It was a systems error,” he said.

It had already emerged in recent weeks that 55 prosecutions brought by the IFI had to be withdrawn due to the same problem, which was first uncovered in March last year and rectified by the following June. It only impacted upon cases that began before, but had not been concluded by, the time the error was corrected.

Mr Coakley said the €10,000 cheque received from Wills Bros, of Foxford, Co Mayo, had not been spent, as the weather had been so bad it meant the suggested works could not be carried out.

Mr Coakley confirmed the money would now be returned.

Legal representatives of all three contractors sought their legal costs, which are likely to be significant given the matter first came before the court in early 2018. The incident in which the number of fish killed was disputed occurred on May 10th, 2017.

Judge Dorgan said no conviction would be recorded with the withdrawal of the prosecution, and that the situation regarding costs was “unprecedented” in the District Court, given the length and complexity of the case.

Mr Coakley said he would seek to defend any application for costs, pointing out that the IFI prosecution took one day while defence arguments were spread over nine days. He said the prosecution was also brought in good faith.

Plunkett Taaffe, solicitor for Rivus Ltd, said that until his clients had been acquitted, their business had “dried up”, and they had been obliged to defend the prosecution in its entirety.

Stephen O’Donoghue BL, for Byrne Looby, said the withdrawal of the prosecution strengthened his client’s argument for costs, and Tom Power BL, for Wills Bros, also said costs should be awarded following the IFI action.

Having considered the matter for some time, Judge Dorgan said she was making an order for costs against the prosecution, and that costs were to be agreed between the parties through a “full and fair” production of bills. In the event that there is no agreement between the parties, she directed they enter a process of mediation, with liberty to have the matter brought back before her in court as a “last resort”.