A Cork doctor, Dr James Barry, got High Court permission yesterday to seek a judicial review of 237 charges preferred against him of "indecent assault" or "sexual assault". He claims the offences no longer exist.
Mr Justice Geoghegan said Dr Barry, of Lauriston Lodge, Glanmire, had an arguable case in relation to whether the offence of "indecent assault" had been abolished last August with the introduction of the Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act 1997.
The judge said there was a question to be argued as to whether Dr Barry could be prosecuted for "indecent" or "sexual" assault.
Dr Barry is seeking an injunction to restrain the DPP taking any further steps in the prosecution. He is also seeking an order to prohibit the District Judge in Cork from dealing with the case.
Mr Justice Geoghegan said he believed the doctor was entitled to apply for a judicial review having regard to the alleged history which would seem, if true, to indicate that the Garda Siochana and the State allowed civil proceedings and proceedings before the Medical Council to go ahead on the alleged understanding there were no criminal proceedings pending.
The judge said that, having regard to the matters alleged and the general history leading to the charges, he would also allow Dr Barry to argue that there had been a pattern of abuse of process and fundamental unfairness amounting to oppression.
Dr John White SC, for Dr Barry, said his client had been charged with 237 offences and there were 43 women involved. The alleged offences related to events which went back to 1966. Dr Barry was 72 years of age and had stated that time was not on his side.
Dr Barry said, in an affidavit, that had his solicitor been aware of any intended criminal proceedings he would have taken steps to have eight civil actions in Cork Circuit Court stayed insofar as they might prejudice any criminal trial.
The decision to defend these civil actions and disciplinary proceedings before the Medical Council was dependent on his firm belief that no criminal proceedings were intended.
His insurers had repudiated liability in respect of the civil proceedings and also in respect of his defence in the Medical Council inquiry, apparently because he would not accept their insistence that their lawyers advise and act for him.
He had a small pension of less than £250 a week and his only other property of any substance was "hopelessly encumbered". Legal fees to date were in excess of £300,000 and he had not been able to pay any money to his lawyers since he had none to pay, he said.