Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

362. To ask the Minister for Defence further to Parliamentary Question No. 131 of 21 January 2015, if due process has been accommodated in this instance, with particular reference to re-instating a decision previously quashed by the High Court; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12714/15]

Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As outlined in my previous replies, following the relevant High Court Order a fresh examination of the case in question was undertaken and all aspects of the case, including, in particular, the representations made by the person’s solicitors, were fully considered by the then Minister for Defence. A new bona fidedecision was made by the then Minister.

Section 13(2) of the Army Pensions Act, 1923, as amended, provides that “Any compensation which may be received from or on behalf of the person alleged to be responsible for the act which caused the wounding ... may be taken into consideration in fixing the amount of any pension, allowance or gratuity which might be awarded under this Act to or in respect of such person and if such compensation is received after the award of any such pension or allowance the Minister may review the award and, having regard to the amount of such compensation, either terminate or reduce the amount thereof.”

I am satisfied that the decision made in this case was in accordance with the relevant statutory provisions and in accordance with the relevant High Court Order.