The judge who this week claimed cyclists had “become a nightmare” previously had a judgment quashed by the High Court because he interrupted a barrister more than 2,000 times in the trial.
A senior judge also barred justice James O’Donohoe from any further involvement in the land dispute case – in which he was accused of bias and acting in bad faith.
Cycling campaigners criticised O’Donohoe this week after he cut the damages awarded to a cyclist after a serious injury.
Conduct of trial ‘overshadowed by excessive judicial intervention’
Circuit Court judge James O’Donohoe presided over a February 2016 trial about a land ownership dispute in county Kildare and gave his judgment the following month.
The unsuccessful parties brought judicial review proceedings against O’Donohoe later that year, alleging he acted in bad faith, was biased, continually interrupted their barrister and inappropriately cross-examined witnesses.
High Court justice Mary Faherty in her 2017 judgment rejected the applicants' claims of bias and bad faith but found that the Circuit Court trial was “overshadowed by (O’Donohoe’s) excessive judicial intervention” and that he had taken over the role of barrister.
“The first respondent (O’Donohoe) interrupted the applicants’ counsel approximately 2,121 times… I am satisfied that the applicants have just cause to feel aggrieved. In my view, the role played by the first respondent (O’Donohoe) almost entirely usurped the function which more properly fell to the applicants’ counsel in the Circuit Court,” said Faherty.
“I am satisfied that the unfairness inherent in the excessive interventions by the first respondent (O’Donohoe) cannot be cured by an appeal of the decision,” she said.
Faherty quashed O’Donohoe’s March 2016 judgment and ordered he have no further role in the case.
