Conor McGregor seeks to introduce 'fresh evidence' in appeal of civil sexual assault finding

The MMA fighter was deemed liable for sexually assaulting Nikita Hand in a Dublin hotel in December 2018 after a three-week civil trial.

CONOR MCGREGOR IS seeking to introduce “fresh evidence” to support his appeal against a civil jury finding that he sexually assaulted a woman in a Dublin hotel in 2018.

Mr Justice Seamus Noonan this morning said that before an appeal could take place, the Court of Appeal must determine whether the fresh evidence is admissible.

This would require a formal application being made along with the filing of affidavits outlining what the fresh evidence is, he said.

In November last year, McGregor was deemed liable for sexually assaulting Nikita Hand in the Beacon Hotel on 9 December 2018 after a three-week civil trial at the High Court, with the jury in the case awarding Hand over €248,000 in damages.

Hand alleged that McGregor raped her in the penthouse of the hotel and “wouldn’t take no for an answer” when she told him that she did not want to have sex with him.

McGregor denied the allegations against him, telling the court that they had “fully consensual” sex.

The jury found that McGregor’s friend James Lawrence, of Rafter’s Road in Drimnagh, did not sexually assault Hand.

He had alleged that he had consensual sex with Hand twice in the Beacon Hotel on 9 December 2018. Hand told the court that she had no memory of this and described it as “a made-up story”.

John Fitzgerald SC, for Lawrence, confirmed to the Court of Appeal this morning that Lawrence had also lodged an appeal. This is understood to be related to the High Court’s decision not to award him his costs in the case.

‘Alleged fresh evidence’

Ray Boland SC, for Hand, told the court that both sides had agreed that the appeals should be heard together and that they would take two days.

He told the court that he would be opposing the application to admit “alleged fresh evidence”.

“Obviously, that can only be admitted in the Court of Appeal on special grounds,” he said.

Boland told the court that the other grounds of appeal relate to the trial that took place in November. He said that if McGregor succeeds on any of those grounds, a fresh trial would take place, “making the application of fresh evidence moot, as it were”.

Mr Justice Noonan said that if McGregor brought an application and it is successful, “it’s not beyond the grounds of possibility that the appellant would succeed on that one issue and not on any of the others”.

Remy Farrell SC, for McGregor, told the court that if they were to submit fresh evidence, “the court has to consider that evidence”.

Mr Justice Noonan said that it’s “one thing to say that there’s going to be fresh evidence, but it’s a matter for this court to grant leave to introduce additional evidence under the rules.

“The way of doing that is bring a motion to be heard on affidavit,” he said.

The judge said he could not see how the appeal could proceed “in the absence of that motion being heard first”.

He said the court must be satisfied that the evidence is new and credible. “Obviously the court would like to know in advance of hearing the appeal what the grounds of the argument are,” he added.

Both sides agreed that the motion would take half a day to be heard.

Mr Justice Noonan said he would give time for both sides to exchange the necessary documents and file the relevant affidavits. He said he would fix a date for the motion to be heard when the matter returns to court on 2 May.

The judge also inquired about the awarding of damages in the High Court case.

The civil jury awarded Hand over €248,000 in damages. But in January, Mr Justice Alexander Owens put a stay on payment of the full amount after counsel for McGregor said he intended to appeal against the decision.

Mr Justice Owens ordered McGregor to pay €100,000 of the damages and €200,000 of the legal costs now, with the remainder deferred pending appeal.

This morning, counsel for both sides told the court that that payment “has been dealt with”.

Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone...

A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article. Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation.

Learn More Support The Journal

Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.

You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.

If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.