A TRIAL JUDGE exceeded his jurisdiction when he directed a jury to acquit a 72-year-old man of historic child sex abuse charges and the High Court was correct to quash that decision, the Court of Appeal was told today.

The man, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, had pleaded not guilty to four counts of indecent assault which were alleged to have taken place between April 1968 and December 1970. 

The complainant, who was related to the accused and was aged between seven and nine at the time of the alleged offences, first notified gardai of the allegations in January 2015. 

The man was returned to face trial in November 2016. 

However, his trial at Bray Circuit Criminal Court only lasted one day after the judge refused to grant the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) an adjournment.  

The court had been informed at a pre-trial hearing in March 2019 that the complainant could not attend proceedings. 

With the chief witness unavailable, the judge directed the following day that the jury was to acquit the accused of all charges. 

A judicial review of the direction was later sought by the DPP, on the grounds that the trial judge had exceeded his jurisdiction and should not have empanelled a jury after being told the main prosecution witness would not be able to attend the trial. 

In a High Court judgement issued last July, Mr Justice Mark Heslin granted the DPP’s application. 

The judge ruled that “the attention of the presiding [trial] judge was not drawn with sufficient clarity to the limits placed upon that jurisdiction in the context of a preliminary hearing at the commencement of a trial on the issue of delay”. 

The man later appealed Mr Justice Heslin’s decision on the grounds that it was still not known when the witness would be available and that there was no “legal authority” which permitted a court to “leave an accused person in jeopardy indefinitely”. 

“The High Court judge made a ruling, and his ruling was wrong in law,” Conor Devally SC, for the appellant, told the Court of Appeal today. 

In response, Sunniva McDonagh SC, for the DPP, said Mr Justice Heslin had “dealt with the matter correctly and his conclusions were correct”. 

Before reserving judgment, Mr Justice John Edwards, presiding, noted the right to an expeditious trial was a “human right”.