Charles Flanagan (Laois, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank Senators Clifford-Lee and Conway for their interventions. While this is a small, two-section Bill, I am sure everybody will agree it will have a highly positive effect in terms of access to justice. If enacted, it will bolster the working capacity of the Court of Appeal so it can keep up with its demanding caseload while also working down any existing delays. Moreover, if the courts-related technical amendments that I have proposed can be agreed, the Bill will also provide a timely legislative vehicle to accommodate those discrete changes that will help to ensure the successful transition of the Office of the Taxing Master to that of the Legal Costs Adjudicator this autumn. This, in turn, will augment the broader historical package of structural reforms that are set to become operational under the Legal Services Regulation Act 2015 over the summer period.

As Members will appreciate, the amendments propose to harmonise the lodgment and tender process across the courts and have been the subject of detailed consultation with the Office of the Taxing Master, the Office of the Attorney General and the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel, given their highly technical nature. They are also being supported by the new rules of court which have been prepared, subject to the agreement of the amendments concerned. The other amendments proposed will include the President of the Court of Appeal in the membership of the new advisory committee on grant of patents of precedence and fast-track the changes in the retirement age of District Court judges from 65 to 70 years for administrative purposes.

At the same time, it is important that we do not lose sight of the cross-cutting role being played by the Court of Appeal since it was set up five years ago. The new court inherited the civil jurisdiction previously exercisable by the Supreme Court in appeals from orders of the High Court, and the criminal appeal jurisdiction of the Court of Criminal Appeal. The Court of Appeal also hears court martial appeals previously dealt with by the Courts-Martial Appeal Court.

For its part, the High Court deals with a broad range of cases, including personal injuries, repossession, debt recovery, contract, extradition, defamation, planning, deportation, asylum and family law cases. It also deals with categories of criminal cases, including bail applications, habeas corpus, cases under Article 40 of the Constitution and matters of judicial review. Therefore, the range of civil appeals coming from that source for the attention of the Court of Appeal is extensive.

The criminal jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal extends to appeal against conviction after a trial by jury in the Central Criminal Court and the Circuit Criminal Court, and following trial in the non-jury Special Criminal Court. Appeals can be taken against the severity of sentence and the Director of Public Prosecutions may appeal a sentence on the grounds of undue leniency. The Court of Appeal also hears applications to quash a conviction on the grounds of new evidence following a previously unsuccessful appeal. I want to also mention that relatively new categories of appeals include appeals by the DPP against an acquittal and appeals under the Criminal Law (Insanity) Act 2006, as amended, arising from the findings as to fitness or otherwise of an accused person to stand trial.

According to the annual report of the Courts Service for 2018, the launch of which I attended yesterday and the details of which are now publicly available onwww.courts.ie, the Court of Appeal had 499 incoming cases on civil law matters in that year, while it resolved 475 such cases in that period. Also last year, the Court of Appeal had 1,266 incoming criminal matters to deal with, while it resolved 1,400 such matters over that period. As we have discussed, the criminal appeals list is running well, with what would be regarded as a broadly acceptable waiting time of five months or less. It also has procedures in place for the allocation of priority hearing dates for appeals where the President of the Court of the Appeal is satisfied there is a sufficient degree of urgency. However, the average waiting time of over 22 months for new civil appeals is unacceptable. It has, as I mentioned earlier, been a source of ongoing concern to the President of the Court of the Appeal, his predecessor and the Chief Justice. The judges are acutely aware of the State's obligation under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights to provide a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time. Despite the maximum use of the available judicial resources and court time, therefore, it has become increasingly evident that the civil caseload of the Court of Appeal is not manageable without the appointment of extra judges.While hearing dates continue to be allocated weekly, taking the optimal approach in case management terms, today's Bill will allow the current list be reviewed by the President of the Court of Appeal. The appointment of six new judges will enable the president to manage the civil list by convening additional courts to prioritise hearing of the remaining Article 64 appeals, transferred from the Supreme Court, while at the same time bringing forward appeals which are on the priority list, bringing forward to earlier dates the appeals that are currently listed for hearing as far ahead as April 2021.

I thank Senators for their consideration of the Bill. I commend the Bill to the House and look forward to its further discussion on Committee Stage in light of the amendments I have outlined. Should the Seanad decide in its wisdom, following careful consideration, to enact its contents by passing Committee and Report Stages tomorrow, it is my intention that the Bill, as enacted, will proceed to be signed by the President and go to Government in early September with the nominations and my recommendations for consideration for appointment by the President at an early date.