The Supreme Court is to consider important legal issues with a view to clarifying the proper approach to sentencing for violent offences committed in the context of intimate-partner relationships.
The issues arise in a man’s appeal against the near-doubling of his sentence over forcing his then-partner into the boot of her car and later savagely beating her.
In a recently published determination, a panel of three Supreme Court judges said the court will hear an appeal by Soufiane Mountassir, who is serving a 5½-year sentence after the Court of Appeal decided last October his original three-year sentence was too lenient.
The appeal raises issues of general public importance concerning the proper approach to sentencing in respect of offences of this kind, the judges said. The issues included the proper application and effect of the Domestic Violence Act 2018 in the context of violent offences involving intimate-partner relationships, an issue not previously considered by the Supreme Court.
Owen Doyle: Chaotic cock-up cost Munster and it reflects badly on a number of people
Dublin-born Irish–American cardinal Kevin Farrell to run Vatican until pope elected
Pope Francis died of a stroke and ‘irreversible heart failure,’ the Vatican has said
New teachers will be fast-tracked into permanent posts to tackle staffing ‘crisis’
It is in the interests of justice that sentencing practice in this area be clarified so far as possible, the judges said.
[ No Visible Bruises: Masterfully unpicking cliches around domestic violenceOpens in new window ]
Mountassir (40), with an address at Mountjoy Square, Dublin 1, pleaded guilty at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court in December 2023 to one count of false imprisonment in Dublin 8 and one count of assault causing harm to his then-partner on Blackhall Street, Dublin 7, in the early hours of November 13th, 2022.
He had been drinking, taking Dalmane and cocaine and smoking cannabis throughout the day of the attack.
Mountassir, who is wanted in Germany for arson, went into what his former partner called “a blind rage”, Judge Orla Crowe heard, and subjected her to one hour and 40 minutes of being beaten and kicked, including punching her and ramming her head against the steering wheel, causing her to fear for her life.
When imposing sentence, Judge Crowe said the victim had “opened her home and heart” to Mountassir. The incident involved a “sustained, humiliating, violent series of offending”, she said.
Having set a headline sentence of five years for the false imprisonment offence and taken into account Mountassir’s guilty plea and his personal circumstances as a foreign national with no family here, she imposed a three-year sentence for false imprisonment. The charge of assault was taken into consideration.
The Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) appealed the sentence as unduly lenient. Last October, the Court of Appeal agreed it was, overturned it and imposed a sentence of 5½ years.
The appeal court noted the serious violence used and that the victim’s liberty was restrained multiple times, with significant trauma caused during the ordeal. The victim was forced into the car boot for 10 minutes before being manhandled into the passenger seat and driven around in a protracted ordeal, with physical violence used that resulted in injuries.
“There was dominance, coercion and an abuse of the power that comes with a male’s greater physical strength,” it said. This was all within the context of an intimate relationship, and Mountassir’s conduct was intended to maximise the distress of the victim, humiliate her and coerce her submission to his dominance, it said.
A hearing date for the Supreme Court appeal will be fixed later.
