Amanda Duffy, Sharon Jordan and Damien McLaughlin's Application and in the matter of decisions of the Police Service of Northern Ireland and Belfast Magistrates' Court
| Jurisdiction | Northern Ireland |
| Judge | McCloskey LJ |
| Neutral Citation | [2022] NICA 34 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Northern Ireland) |
| Date | 13 June 2022 |
1
Neutral Citation No: [2022] NICA 34
Judgment: approved by the court for handing down
(subject to editorial corrections)*
Ref: McC11875
ICOS No: 2021/080183
2021/080189
2021/080195
Delivered: 13/06/2022
IN HER MAJESTY’S COURT OF APPEAL IN NORTHERN IRELAND
___________
ON APPEAL FROM THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN NORTHERN IRELAND
___________
QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION
(JUDICIAL REVIEW)
___________
IN THE MATTER OF APPLICATIONS BY AMANDA DUFFY,
SHARON JORDAN AND DAMIEN McLAUGHLIN
FOR LEAVE TO APPLY FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW
AND IN THE MATTER OF DECISIONS OF THE POLICE SERVICE OF
NORTHERN IRELAND AND BELFAST MAGISTRATES’ COURT
___________
Representation:
Mr John Larkin QC and Mr Joseph O’Keefe of counsel (instructed by Phoenix Law
Solicitors): Amanda Duffy
Mr John Larkin QC and Ms Laura King of counsel (instructed by Phoenix Law Solicitors):
Sharon Jordan
Mr John Larkin QC and Mr Plunkett Nugent of counsel (instructed by Phoenix Law
Solicitors): Damien McLaughlin
Mr Mark Robinson QC and Mr Michael McCartan of counsel (instructed by
the PSNI Legal Services Branch): Police Service of Northern Ireland
___________
Glossary
BMC: Belfast Magistrates’ Court
HMT: HM Treasury
LMP: London Metropolitan Police Service
Police Service: Police Service of Northern Ireland
WMC: Westminster Magistrates’ Court.
2
McCloskey LJ
Introduction
[1] Amanda Duffy, Sharon Jordan and Damien McLaughlin (“the appellants”)
appeal to this court against the judgement and order of Colton J whereby, following
a so-called “rolled up” hearing, leave to apply for judicial review was granted and
the substantive applications were dismissed. It is convenient to highlight at the
outset that there were five public authorities involved in the matrix giving rise to
these proceedings. These are, respectively, HM Treasury (“HMT”), the London
Metropolitan Police Service (“LMP”), Westminster Magistrates’ Court (“WMC”), the
Police Service of Northern Ireland (the “Police Service”) and Belfast Magistrates’
Court (“BMC”).
[2] The central target of the appellants’ challenge has at all times been the Police
Service. Only this agency was represented at first instance and continues to be
represented.
The Judicial Review Challenges
[3] The relevant chain of events began with an application by LMP to WMC for
orders freezing certain credit union and bank accounts held by the appellants. On
6 May 2021 WMC acceded to these applications. Some two weeks later LMP
conveyed to WMC that the orders had been made without jurisdiction, in
consequence whereof they were set aside by that court. Next on 19 May 2021 the
Police Service applied ex parte to BMC for comparable orders. BMC made the
orders sought on the same date. By a further order dated 17 September 2021 an
extension of the operative period was ordered by BMC.
[4] These judicial review proceedings were initiated on 11 October 2021. The
target of the appellants’ challenges was framed, in each case, in these terms:
“Decisions of (i) the Police Service of Northern Ireland
made on 19 May 2021 and 17 September 2021 and (ii)
Belfast Magistrates’ Court made on 19 May 2021 and 17
September 2021.”
The orders made by BMC on the two dates in question related to specified First
Trust Bank and Credit Union accounts. The effect of the orders was to freeze these
accounts. As of today they remain frozen.
[5] The impetus for the Police Service applications and the ensuing orders of
BMC was a joint Police Service/LMP investigation into terrorist finances. In
consequence of the impugned orders of BMC altogether eight accounts remain
frozen. Colton J, commendably, processed the first instance hearings and his
resulting judgment with considerable expedition. He did so having been informed
To continue reading
Request your trial