Supreme Court rebukes judge for ‘personally insulting’ counsel

Supreme Court rebukes judge for 'personally insulting' counsel

The Supreme Court has rebuked a High Court judge for making “quite remarkable and personally insulting comments” aimed at counsel in an international protection case.

Ms Justice Marie Baker, handing down judgment yesterday in an appeal brought by a Ukrainian seeking to return to Ireland to apply for international protection, sharply criticised “certain comments and remarks” made by Mr Justice Richard Humphreys last year.

She said the comments “called into question the professional integrity and ability of counsel on both sides” and had “no place in a judgment”, even if they were meant to be flippant.

Ms Justice Baker wrote: “The relationship between counsel and court must be one of mutual respect. The judge is in a particular position of power and can damage or destroy a career with a remark made in court or in a written judgement.

“Equally a judge can cause personal distress, not just because the judge holds a position of power, but also because he or she is held in high esteem by the profession and generally by members of society.

“It is no part of the judge’s role to be personally insulting to the lawyers who appear before him or her. While there may be occasions when a judge may in a written judgement expressly doubt the integrity of counsel or his or her professional competence, that is not something to be done lightly and certainly not without giving an opportunity to the lawyer to respond and defend his or her reputation and professional competence.”

She added: “What may trip lightly from the judge can fall heavily or very heavily on counsel in the light of the power imbalance. The unique position of the judge therefore carries the burden and responsibility of restraint in regard to observations, whether professional or personal, made regarding counsel or solicitor who appears before him or her.

“While I disagree with the reasoning of the trial judge in the present case his judgement was lucid, reasoned, elegant and intelligent. It would be a shame if the erudition displayed in his writing were to be lost in his more colourful observations which in my view are regrettable and have no place in a judgment of a court of law.”

Share icon
Share this article: