The High Court has dismissed an action by a prison officer who claimed he was subjected to ongoing and repeated bullying behaviour for years.
Mr Justice Mark Heslin found that Mountjoy Prison officer John Muldowney had delayed bringing and prosecuting his action and failed to provide sufficient detail of the alleged bullying against him which would have allowed the authorities to investigate his claims and properly defend the case.
The judge said he was therefore acceding to a dismissal application from the prison governor, the Minister for Justice and Equality and the State, who were defendants in the case.
Mr Muldowney, who the court heard had not worked since 2016, brought proceedings in 2019 against the defendants claiming that from in or about 2010 he was subjected to “ongoing and repeated bullying behaviour by the governors at Mountjoy Prison”.
Mr Justice Heslin found there was inordinate and inexcusable delay by Mr Muldowney in bringing and progressing his case.
He was also satisfied that, in the interests of justice his claim should be dismissed because of his failure to comply with the Civil Liability Act 2004 requiring plaintiffs to provide full particulars of the claim they make.
Mr Muldowney had also failed to provide certain affidavits outlining and verifying his case, he said.
The evidence presented on his behalf by his solicitor included a letter in which Mr Muldowney had complained to the governor about another officer repeatedly refusing to serve him breakfast in the work canteen in front of colleagues and inmates.
There was another letter to him from the prison assistant governor warning that an “exchange of duty” privilege, may be withdrawn for a period because of Mr Muldowney’s “pattern of non-reciprocation in his attendance”.
There was another letter in which he sought clarification from the governor about a prisoner complaint against him; being late for morning parades; and leaving the St Patrick’s adolescent wing to change in Mountjoy locker room.
There was also a letter in which Mr Muldowney complained that while on night duty on November 9th, 2016, he was the subject of retaliatory bullying from an assistant chief officer.
There was another December 2015 letter from a GP to a consultant psychiatrist stating Mr Muldowney reported ongoing problems at work for some time, that he felt he was being bullied, and that he was having problems at work in relation to the amount of sick leave he has taken.
The judge said that because Mr Muldowney never provided sufficient details of his allegations, to comply with the 2004 act, it meant the defendants never had sufficient particulars for the purposes of investigating the claim in the context of preparing a defence.
He was satisfied that the passage of time, of up to 16 years, from relevant events would constitute prejudice likely to lead to a real risk of an unfair trial or unjust result.
- Sign up for push alerts and have the best news, analysis and comment delivered directly to your phone
- Find The Irish Times on WhatsApp and stay up to date
- Our In The News podcast is now published daily – Find the latest episode here