A judge has pulled out of a case in which two sons of multimillionaire developer and amusement arcade owner Jim Kennedy have appealed convictions of obstructing gardaí.
Garrett Cooney SC asked Judge Jacqueline Linnane to discharge herself from the appeal by Patrick and Joseph Kennedy on the grounds that she had shown bias in a ruling against an application by him for a direction at the halfway stage to dismiss the case against them.
Mr Cooney had last week submitted that a warrant gardaí used to search Amusement City arcade, Westmoreland Street, Dublin, was defective and that their evidence of the search had been unreliable.
The Kennedys, who live in Castleknock, Dublin, had each been fined €1,500 in the District Court in October last year which, in spite of their denials, had found them guilty of obstructing gardaí in the execution of a search warrant.
They were appealing their convictions and fines to the Circuit Court, and Mr Cooney, following completion of Garda evidence and before making a decision as to whether he would call the Kennedys to give evidence, had sought the direction dismissing the case.
Judge Linnane, delivering a reserved judgment yesterday on Mr Cooney's application, said the court did not accept that the warrant was defective. Later in her judgment she said: "I am satisfied that Patrick Kennedy tried to prevent and obstruct them going down to the basement."
Mr Cooney, who retires on Friday, submitted to Judge Linnane that she had made a finding of obstruction against Patrick Kennedy before the case had concluded, thereby showing bias against the defendants.
He said the court had also accepted that the search warrant was valid without having heard any evidence to the contrary from the Kennedys before coming to a conclusion.
"You have made a finding of guilt without giving the appellants an opportunity to be heard. You have gone beyond ruling that there was a case to be answered," Mr Cooney said.
"I have to ask you to disqualify yourself and set down the appeal for trial before another judge."
Judge Linnane, following an adjournment, said there had been an observation by counsel of bias in her ruling and that she should discharge herself. She was going to accede to that application.
The appeal was returned for mention in the new law term to fix a date for a hearing before a different judge.