Bowden's (Bronagh) Application as Personal Representative of Liam Holden (Deceased) and in the matter of a decision taken by The Department of Justice in Northern Ireland
| Jurisdiction | Northern Ireland |
| Judge | Mr Simpson KC sitting as HCJ |
| Judgment Date | 12 September 2023 |
| Neutral Citation | [2023] NIKB 89 |
| Court | King's Bench Division (Northern Ireland) |
1
Neutral Citation No: [2023] NIKB 89
Judgment: approved by the court for handing down
(subject to editorial corrections)*
Ref: SIM12252
ICOS No: 18/73662/01
Delivered: 12/09/2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN NORTHERN IRELAND
___________
KING’S BENCH DIVISION
(JUDICIAL REVIEW)
___________
IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY BRONAGH BOWDEN,
AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF LIAM HOLDEN (DECEASED)
FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW
AND IN THE MATTER OF A DECISION TAKEN BY THE
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE IN NORTHERN IRELAND
___________
Dessie Hutton KC (instructed by Harte Coyle Collins Solicitors) for the applicant
Philip McAteer of counsel (instructed by Departmental Solicitor’s Office) for the
respondent
___________
SIMPSON J
Introduction
[1] The original applicant, Liam Holden, has died since the commencement of
these proceedings. In this judgment he will be referred to as ‘the deceased.’ The
case is now being pursued by his personal representative, Ms Bronagh Bowden,
(“the applicant”). The respondent is the Department of Justice (“the Department”).
[2] The issue in this case can be shortly stated: does the ‘compensation’ provided
for in section 133A of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (“the 1988 Act”) include the costs
incurred by an applicant in making the application for compensation.
[3] The background facts are not in any dispute so they, too, can be shortly
stated.
[4] In 1973 the deceased was convicted of the (then) capital offence of murder
and was sentenced to death; the sentence was later commuted to one of life
imprisonment. In 1989 the deceased was released on licence. In 2012 the conviction
was quashed by the Court of Appeal. The prosecution did not seek to support the
2
conviction. The relevant part of the Court of Appeal’s judgment ([2012] NICA 26)
identified the following reasoning:
“[24] The case against the appellant depended decisively
on the alleged admissions made to the army and the
police. In light of the material now disclosed we consider
that there is a real possibility that the admissions would
not have been admitted in evidence and that if they had
been admitted they may not have been considered
reliable by the jury. Accordingly, we consider the
conviction is unsafe and allow the appeal.”
[5] Although that fact appears in the documentation accompanying the
deceased’s application for compensation, at the commencement of this application I
reminded the parties that I had appeared for the prosecution at that appeal, when
the prosecution indicated that it was not seeking to support the conviction. Neither
party indicated any objection to my hearing this application.
[6] Following the quashing of the conviction the deceased, in February 2014,
lodged an application for compensation for a miscarriage of justice pursuant to the
provisions of section 133 of the 1988 Act. An independent assessor, then Kevin
Rooney QC (“the IA”) determined that the total amount of compensation for
pecuniary and non-pecuniary loss was £1,182,166. However, since the provisions of
the 1988 Act restricted the maximum award of compensation to £1 million, the
deceased received £1 million. On 22 March 2017 the respondent wrote to the
deceased’s solicitors enclosing a document setting out the relevant figures and
noting that the cap was £1 million. The deceased, if content to accept the payment,
was to sign the document (and did sign the document on 23 March 2017), which
read (where material):
“I William Holden accept £1,000,000 in full and final
settlement of my application with the Department of
Justice for compensation for a miscarriage of justice under
section 133 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988…”
[7] In the course of preparing his case for compensation the deceased incurred
legal costs and the costs of instructing expert witnesses. Subsequently, the IA
assessed as being “necessary reasonable and proportionate” the costs incurred in the
sum of £120,171.12.
[8] The Department has refused to pay these costs. In an email of 3 May 2018
containing what the applicant says is the impugned decision, the respondent said, in
response to a request for the payment of the costs:
“Please note as previous correspondence has highlighted,
Section 133A (5) of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (as
To continue reading
Request your trial