Gerry Adams fights case brought by three bombing victims to establish his membership of the IRA
Gerry Adams is trying to get a case thrown out which could establish his membership of the IRA.
Three mainland bombing victims have accused the former Sinn Fein president of seeking to “close down any public hearing in which his membership of the Provisional Irish Republican Army might be evidenced and established”.
John Clark, a victim of the March 1973 Old Bailey bombing in London; Jonathan Ganesh, caught in the February 1996 London Docklands bombing; and Barry Laycock, victim of the June 1996 Arndale shopping centre bombing in Manchester, have sued Mr Adams and the IRA and want “nominal” damages of £1.
Claims ‘should be struck out’
A barrister leading Mr Adams’s legal team told a High Court judge in London on Tuesday that damages claims brought against the Provisional IRA should be struck out.
But a barrister leading the three claimants’ legal team argued Mr Adams’s application to strike out the claims should be dismissed and a trial should be progressed.
Mr Justice Soole is considering Mr Adams’s application at a High Court hearing in the Royal Courts of Justice complex.
Richard Hermer KC, who is leading Mr Adams’s legal team, said the IRA was an “unincorporated association” which was “incapable in law of being sued”.
Mr Hermer said the conduct of the claims had been “characterised by a significant number of procedural breaches and irregularities”.
He said the timing of the claims was “designed to circumvent pending legislation” which would prohibit such a claim from being brought.
Anne Studd KC, who is leading the claimants’ legal team, said each man alleged Mr Adams was “liable to them” both as an “individual given the part he played in the preparation and planning of the attacks”, and as a “representative” of the IRA.
‘This case raises important issues’
“The effect of (Mr Adams’s) application is to seek to close down any public hearing in which his membership of the IRA might be evidenced and established,” Ms Studd told Mr Justice Soole.
“Such a course should not be endorsed by the courts.
“This case raises important issues on access to justice in cases where a group of claimants alleged the most heinous wrongdoing by an individual who they allege was a member of an organisation responsible for significant injury through terrorist means.
“If (Mr Adams’s) application succeeds, then its effect would be to give a claimant no cause of action against an individual as a representative of an unincorporated association where the defendant seeks to deny such an association without submitting any evidence, as is the case here.”
The hearing is due to end on Wednesday and the judge is expected to deliver a ruling in the near future.