In the matter of an application by Martina Dillon, John McEvoy, Brigid Hughes and Lynda McManus for Judicial Review (Respondents)

Permission to Appeal application lodged

Case summary
Appeal
Permission to Appeal
Previous proceedings

Case summary

Case ID

UKSC/2025/0013

Parties

Appellant(s)

The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland

Respondent(s)

Martina Dillon, John McEvoy, Brigid Hughes and Lynda McManus

Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland

Department of Justice and Coroners Service for NI

Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission

Equality Commission for Northern Ireland

Wave Trauma Centre

Amnesty International (UK)

ICRIR

Issue

In summary, did the Court of Appeal err by holding that: (1) The trial judge at first instance was entitled to disapply provisions of the Legacy Act under Article 2(1) of the Windsor Framework (and the related EU and Treaty mechanisms); (2) The trial judge was wrong to find no violation of the European Convention of Human Rights ("ECHR") with respect to the ability of the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery (“ICRIR”) to comply with its obligations under the ECHR.

Facts

This is the first ever appeal of a decision to disapply primary legislation pursuant to Article 2(1) of the Windsor Framework. In 1997, Martina Dillon’s husband was shot and killed in Northern Ireland, making up one of the more than 3,500 killed, with another 40,000 injured, from the time of the Troubles. Around 1,200 cases remain unsolved. There are 700 civil cases in the judicial system, and less than 20 approaching trial. On 17 May 2022, following the “New Decade, New Approach” agreement, the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act (the “Legacy Act”) was passed, granting conditional immunity to those involved in death from the Troubles. As of 1 May 2024, police investigations, the police ombudsman and various inquests into the Troubles were replaced with a new body, the IICRIR, which is to carry out reviews of these deaths and harmful conduct. An application was made to apply for judicial review, challenging various provisions of the Act. These included those which: created and facilitated immunity from prosecution; established ICRIR, its functions and its working mechanisms; controlled the disclosure of material to and by ICRIR; prohibited criminal enforcement action in relation to Troubles-related offences unless ‘serious’ or ‘connected’; and ended inquests, criminal investigations by police, civil proceedings and police complaints. Both the High Court and Court of Appeal found various provisions of the Legacy Act as incompatible with the Human Rights Act, issuing declarations of incompatibility under section 4; and as incompatible with the Windsor Framework, disapplying it under Article 2. The Appellant appeals these decisions.