Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)

We must allow some discretion to the Judiciary in these circumstances. If the applicant brings the case back to court – which is one of the points about which we were concerned – and the notes of the decision and the affidavits have not been served on the respondent, the judge will inquire into the reasons for that. That affords a certain protection for the respondent. On the other hand, if the expiry period of the notice is approaching and the respondent cannot be found, the applicant can renew the order, through a solicitor, by going back to court before the eight days have expired. If they do so subsequent to the expiry date, they will not be in a worse position than they were when seeking the first interim order because the circumstances are the same. In fact, the circumstances are probably better because if the respondent has respected the eight day barring order, presumably the risk has at least been diminished, if not removed.

We should leave the discretion to the court. If we were to tie the hands of the court we could find that the legislation is less likely to work effectively than it will as currently constructed. Undoubtedly, the way in which it is now constructed relies upon judicial discretion, but I think we can depend on that.