Strike hits Monaghan Circuit Court sittings

- Michael McDonnell-

HOPES that the so-called solicitors’ “strike” would have been resolved before the new legal year commenced on Monday of last week have come to nothing, as it appears the lawyers’ dispute with Minster for Justice Jim O’Callaghan is set to rumble on for some time yet.

The stand-off, which has seen individual solicitors in the Cavan-Monaghan court area withdraw their services, more or less en masse in criminal legal aid cases, has been causing major disruption at local district court sittings since a new payments framework was introduced at the start of July.

And, as Monaghan Circuit Court began its October sessions last week, it became clear that the ongoing disruption may well result in a significant negative impact on the higher court. On the opening day, the unavailability of legal representation was cited in a considerable number of cases as necessitating adjournment to the court’s next term, which runs in January.

The Circuit Court in Monaghan, which deals with cases that are more serious in nature than those heard in the district court, was already challenged by a sizeable backlog of cases, but that is being exacerbated by the solicitors’ dispute.

The lawyers have taken their action in protest at Minster O’Callaghan’s decision to replace a payments system, in which legal aid certificates could previously be issued for every adjourned hearing, with a one-off flat fee of €520 per case from the first hearing to conclusion.

Under the old scheme, solicitors received €240 for a first representation at court and €60 for each subsequent appearance. They argue, among other things, that complicated cases, perhaps involving vulnerable clients in respect of whom multiple court appearances might be necessary, could not run fairly under the single-payment model.

It had initially been hoped that progress on the issue might be made during the “holiday” month of August, but as the district courts got back into action in September it was clear that any opportunity in this regard had been missed. Judges were left with no option but to adjourn cases for a month or two in anticipation of a resolution.

Numerous legally aided criminal cases have had to be deferred in the meantime, in many instances on more than one occasion, with some defendants in custody or even bail hearings being forced to fend for themselves in the interim.

At the outset of the Monaghan Circuit Court hearings last week, Paul Boyce, solicitor, told Judge John Aylmer that the ongoing industrial action against Minister O’Callaghan’s attempts to change the legal aid system would continue.

BLAME GAME

Stating that it appeared Minister O’Callaghan wanted to “fix the blame” for inefficiencies in the system on the legal profession, Mr Boyce said solicitors took great offence to this and did not accept it at all.

The Monaghan town-based lawyer said the minister had also refused to engage with their organisation, the Law Society, pending the outcome of a High Court judicial challenge against the new payment structure.

In the High Court case Mr Boyce was referring to, it was anticipated that a ruling, initially expected yesterday Tuesday (October 13), might help break the logjam. But Ms Justice Mary Rose Gearty told lawyers on Thursday of last week that a judgement would not be ready by Tuesday.

The judicial review arose after Minister O’Callaghan’s initial decision was quickly challenged by John Quinn of Dublin-based John M. Quinn & Co Solicitors, in a legal action seeking to quash the statutory instrument underpinning the new single-payment arrangement.

The Minister had been invited last week by Law Society president Rosemarie Loftus to speak with solicitors’ representatives, but he stated that mediation was “not appropriate” given the outstanding High Court ruling.

Mr Boyce, a member of Monaghan Solicitors Bar Association, also confirmed to Judge Aylmer that solicitors acting in this court had all taken individual decisions to withdraw their services from legal aid cases for as long as the matter remained unresolved.

‘No Choice’

“It’s not what we want to do Judge,” he insisted. “We want to represent our clients; we want to do our jobs, but we feel we have no choice, given the minister’s intransigence.”

On that note, Mr Boyce confirmed that solicitors were withdrawing their services in relation to the list before the court.

Thanking Mr Boyce for giving this update on the solicitors’ position, Judge Aylmer said he was noting what was said and would have to organise the list of cases before the court in a manner that took account of those circumstances.

Unfortunately, this industrial action meant that a lot of the cases would have to be adjourned, the judge stated, adding that that there was nothing he could do about it.

During the subsequent initial “call over” of cases before the court, a large portion (roughly one in four) of the just over 100 names recorded in the criminal list were subsequently adjourned on that basis to the next sessions, which begin on January 12, 2027.

It is also expected that, as the week goes on, many more cases will similarly have to put back to next year because of the ongoing dispute.

Minister O’Callaghan has insisted that, notwithstanding the solicitors’ stance, criminal cases are ongoing across the country. But it is clear to reporters on the ground that the weekly build-up of adjourned cases is going to result in significant backlogs at district court level, and that the same problem may well give rise to severe consequences for the higher courts and the justice system as a whole if the deadlock is allowed to continue for a significant length of time.