The Supreme Court yesterday upheld a High Court decision quashing an order from the Attorney General directing a new inquest into the death of a Co Dublin man during a routine operation almost five years ago.
The AG's directive for a new inquest into the death of Mr Thomas Doherty (54), Kilcross, Sandyford, Co Dublin on July 1st, 1992 had been successfully challenged in the High Court by Dublin City Coroner Dr Brian Farrell.
In a reserved judgment on January 30th last, Mr Justice Smyth said Section 24 (1) of the Coroners Act, 1962 did not give the Attorney General authority to direct a coroner to hold an inquest on a person into whose death an inquest had been held already so long as the verdict remained unimpeached by the legal process.
The verdict of the inquest jury stood. The judge granted an order quashing the AG's directive. The AG appealed the High Court decision to the Supreme Court.
Rejecting the appeal yesterday, Mr Justice Keane, sitting with the Chief Justice, Mr Justice Hamilton, and Mr Justice Barrington, said the case raised an important statutory point. This was whether the undoubted jurisdiction of the AG to order a fresh inquest into the death of a person was confined to cases in which the verdict in the first inquest was quashed by the High Court.
There was no reason to doubt, when the AG informed Mr Doherty's widow that he did not consider a new inquest necessary, that the AG had carefully reviewed all the documents before him.
Not a scintilla of evidence had been pointed to explain why there was later a complete change of mind by the AG on the matter in directing a new inquest, Mr Justice Keane said. The only difference was that Mrs Doherty had changed her attitude and had called for the inquest to be reopened.
The judge said the AG had an important power which was to be exercised by him alone and was not conditional on the assent or dissent of another party. When the AG had directed a new inquest, there was no material before him to justify the reversal of his earlier decision.
Mr Justice Keane said he was satisfied the High Court was correct in quashing the directive of the AG ordering a fresh inquest into the death of Mr Doherty on the grounds the decision was unreasonable and ultra vires. He was also satisfied there was no breach of fair procedures by the AG.
Mr Doherty died suddenly while undergoing a routine operation at St Vincent's Hospital, Dublin. An inquest was held in December 1992. The High Court heard Mr Doherty's widow, Anne, had given evidence which confirmed to the coroner and the jury that her late husband had been allergic to penicillin.
Mr Justice Smyth said that in summing up to the jury, Dr Farrell drew attention to the medical evidence, the disagreement by the medical witnesses as to the possible or probable cause of death being related to the administration of a trial dose of antibiotic during the operation and, in particular, Mrs Doherty's evidence of her husband's allergy to penicillin.
The jury's verdict was that Mr Doherty died from "acute cardiac failure and pulmonary oedema and that this was due to an episode of hypertension, possibly due to an anaphylactic reaction to Augmentin, combined with severe coronary arterial disease and hypersensitive cardiac disease."
Mr Justice Smyth said Dr Farrell was of the opinion that the verdict reflected the evidence given at the inquest and so recorded it in correspondence 18 months later. At that time, the AG was writing concerning the conduct of the inquest. The AG, in correspondence, expressed concern that dissatisfaction about the inquest had arisen.