Four Traveller families whose caravans were seized by gardaí in Ennis, Co Clare, on July 16th, have taken a constitutional challenge in the High Court to the controversial new criminal trespass legislation under which their vehicles were taken.
The challenge by the Travellers to the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2002, which was voted through on the eve of the May general election, is expected to be heard in October.
The Act permits gardaí to remove caravans and bring their owners to court in certain circumstances and also makes it an offence to enter lands without permission or to bring "objects" such as caravans or horses onto lands.
Meanwhile, proceedings by the Travellers aimed at recovering their caravans have been adjourned to next Wednesday after terms for temporarily resolving the situation were agreed yesterday afternoon.
Counsel for the gardaí told Mr Justice Murphy that the plaintiffs had been told they could obtain their caravans if they went to the gardaí and made declarations in relation to ownership of the vehicles.
A lawyer for the plaintiffs said there was no difficulty with that proposal to "hold" the situation until next week. Some members of the families had accommodation which was being paid for by the local health board and which would be available until next week.
The plaintiffs have taken proceedings against the Garda Commissioner, Clare County Council, Ennis Town Council, Ireland and the Attorney General.
When the case was before the court earlier yesterday, counsel for Clare County Council said his client was in a position to provide, on an emergency basis, a large mobile home at Liscannor, Co Clare, where some of the Travellers had been located previously.
The judge asked if it would be more equitable for the Travellers' own caravans to be returned to them pending further proceedings and let the plaintiffs stay in them rather than supplying a large mobile home to them.
When the hearing resumed later in the day, counsel for the gardaí said he was instructed that if the caravan-owners applied for them, made declarations as to ownership and went to a location where they would not be committing an offence, there would be no problem.