Michael Lynn fails in last ditch bid to delay upcoming criminal trial

3rd February 2022

---

Former solicitor Michael Lynn has failed in a last ditch bid to delay his trial over the alleged theft of almost €30m.

Lawyers for Mr Lynn (51) claim they are not being adequately paid under a legal aid scheme to review voluminous evidence disclosed by the prosecution.

Mr Lynn’s legal team, who only came into the case late last year after his previous defence team dropped out, also claim they have insufficient time to review documents before Mr Lynn’s trial is due to begin next week.

Some 183,000 pages of material have been disclosed.

They also claim expert witnesses for the defence have not been fully briefed and have yet to provide reports.

However, his judicial review application seeking orders quashing a decision by Judge Martin Nolan of Dublin Circuit Criminal Court to proceed with the trial next Monday was refused today by the High Court.

On January 22, Judge Nolan refused a request from Mr Lynn’s lawyers to delay the trial until such time as the issues complained of had been resolved.

Mr Justice Charles Meenan found Judge Nolan acted within his jurisdiction in reaching his decision, having case-managed the matter for a number of years.

“I can see no legal infirmity in the decision reached by Judge Nolan and the principles he applied,” said Mr Justice Meenan.

After the ruling, Mr Lynn’s counsel Feargal Kavanagh SC asked the Mr Justice Meenan to prohibit the reporting of the judicial review hearing until after the criminal trial. This application was also rejected.

“The Constitution clearly provides under Article 34 that justice is to be administered in public,” the judge said.

Mr Lynn, of Millbrook Court, Red Cross, Co Wicklow, is facing 21 charges relating to alleged theft from financial institutions involving 23 properties, all of which he denies.

“They involve the taking of multiple mortgages out in relation to those properties which the prosecution say amount to offences of theft,” said Patrick McGrath SC, counsel for the Director of Public Prosecutions, in respect of the charges.

Generally, defence teams receive the same fees as the prosecution, and that is the case for Mr Lynn’s trial.

However, his counsel Mr Kavanagh said the defence team was entitled to receive addition fees for considering disclosure.

“We are entitled to be paid for work we have to do which the prosecution doesn’t have to do,” he said.

Mr Kavanagh said defence counsel were limited to reviewing disclosure for four hours each day under the legal aid scheme payments which had been allowed. This was insufficient to deal with the volume of material, he said.

He said the issue had been raised with the Minister for Justice around Christmas but claimed the defence team was “being stonewalled”.

Mr Kavanagh said counsel were not being paid to do “essential work necessary for the case” and argued his client’s fair trial rights would be infringed if the case was allowed to proceed as planned next week.

The application was opposed by Mr McGrath for the DPP, who claimed it was “without merit”.

He said the case was “somewhat difficult” but “not exceptionally complicated”. The book of evidence runs to 518 pages and was served in 2018. There were less than 1,000 exhibits, he said.

Mr McGrath pointed out that Mr Lynn was now on his fourth set of solicitors in the case and that previous legal representatives had told the Circuit Court on two occasions that the case was ready for trial.

Mr Justice Meenan said he was rejecting a submission that the trial should be delayed until the issue of fees is resolved.

“If that was the case criminal trials would be endlessly delayed, which undoubtedly would not be in the public interest,” he said.