Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
Court of Appeal dismisses appeal from High Court, and affirms refusal to grant judicial review of decisions by the director of a children's detention centre to apply a 'single separation procedure' to a child who had been involved in serious incidents including assault of a staff member, and an 8-hour 'stand off' with a number of detainees and staff members, on the grounds that: (a) the director had provided extensive justification for the application for the policy, and had not been cross-examined on his affidavit in this regard; (b) the evidence was that the separation policy had primarily been applied in the interests of the child's own safety and welfare, and was not intended as a punishment; and (c) it was not appropriate to compare the position of an adult prisoner and a child detainee for the purpose of applying constitutional rights.
Whelan J (nem diss): Judicial review - child in detention centre - Children Act 2001 - measures applied to child in detention centre - 'ad hoc punishment regime' - alleged lack of procedural safeguards - whether child being 'punished' or 'assisted with the management of his behaviour' - 'Single Separation Policy' - management of challenging behaviour - assault of staff member - abuse of staff member - '8-hour stand off' with staff members - dismissal of application in High Court - whether situation analogous to adult prison - whether segregation / separation of child constituted a punishment - threshold for requiring procedural rights - whether sufficient procedural safeguards - whether child detainees and adult prisoners appropriate comparators for Art 40.1 of the Constitution - whether differential treatment of adult prisoners and child detainees served a legitimate legislative purpose - Children Act 2001 (Amalgamation of Children Detention Schools) Order 2016 (S.I. No. 273 of 2016) - purpose of child detention schools - role of director as in loco parentis.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
The only subject matter index for all Irish judgments over the past thirteen years. Click here to request a subscription.
Register Now