Arthurs (Patrick) as personal representative of Declan Arthurs (deceased) v Ministry of Defence and Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland
| Jurisdiction | Northern Ireland |
| Judge | Master Bell |
| Judgment Date | 05 February 2016 |
| Neutral Citation | [2016] NIMaster 1 |
| Date | 05 February 2016 |
| Year | 2016 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Northern Ireland) |
1
Neutral Citation No. [2016] NIMaster 1
Ref:
Judgment: approved by the Court for handing down
Delivered:
05/02/2016
(subject to editorial corrections)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE OF NORTHERN IRELAND
------
QUEEN’S BENCH DIVISION
------
BETWEEN:
Patrick Arthurs as personal representative of Declan Arthurs (deceased)
Plaintiff;
and
Ministry of Defence
and
Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland
Defendants.
------
Master Bell
Introduction
[1] On 8 May 1987 Declan Arthurs was one of nine persons shot dead in
Loughgall by soldiers. The incident has given rise to various legal processes and
2
proceedings. The complex history of those processes and proceedings may be
summarised as follows.
[2] Firstly, there was a criminal investigation. Officers from the Royal Ulster
Constabulary Criminal Investigation Department, the Scenes of Crime Department
and the Northern Ireland Forensic Laboratory attended at the scene on the day of the
shooting. Subsequently, police officers conducted lengthy interviews with soldiers.
On 21 July 1988 the RUC forwarded a report to the Director of Public Prosecutions
for Northern Ireland on the outcome of their investigation. On 22 September 1988
the Director concluded that the evidence did not warrant the prosecution of any
person involved in the shootings.
[3] Secondly, there was an inquest. Following adjournments to allow litigation
regarding the powers of coroners to reach a decision, an inquest into the death of Mr
Arthurs and the others who died at Loughgall opened on 30 May 1995. On the first
day of the inquest, counsel representing the family of Mr Arthurs and five of the
other families asked for the proceedings to be adjourned. This adjournment was
refused and counsel was instructed by the six families to withdraw from the hearing
to seek a remedy by way of judicial review. The hearing of the inquest proceeded
without representation for any of the nine families. The Coroner heard 45 witnesses
and it was concluded on 2 June 1995 that all nine men had died from serious and
multiple gunshot wounds. The family of Mr Arthurs sought judicial review of the
Coroner’s decisions and, in a judgment of 24 May 1996, the High Court refused to
quash the Coroner’s decisions or the jury verdict.
[4] Thirdly, civil proceedings were instituted. A writ commencing civil
proceedings in respect of Mr Arthurs’ death issued in 1990. A Statement of Claim
was served on 24 January 1994. A defence was served on 3 March 1994. The civil
proceedings as originally issued were against the Ministry of Defence. Subsequently,
however, an order was granted to add the Chief Constable of the Police Service of
Northern Ireland as a second defendant. It is with these civil proceedings that this
application is concerned. It is important to note that this court is not tasked with any
role in connection with either the criminal investigation into the death of Mr Arthurs
or the inquest into his death.
[5] On 4 May 2001, on an application from the next-of-kin of the nine men killed
at Loughgall, the European Court of Human Rights concluded in Kelly & Others v
United Kingdom (Application 30054/96) that the proceedings for investigating the use
of lethal force by the security forces had been shown to disclose the following
shortcomings :
(i) a lack of independence of the investigating police officers from the
security forces involved in the incident;
(ii) a lack of public scrutiny, and information to the victims’ families, of the
reasons for the decision of the DPP not to prosecute any soldier;
To continue reading
Request your trial