Vol. 571 No. 1
1161 Ms Shortall asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if stenographers do not currently take notes of the arguments put forward by parents or the judgments made in family law cases that are held in camera and no records are ever kept; if so, the reason for this; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20187/03]
The Courts Service does not provide stenography services in Circuit or District Court civil cases. Stenography is provided only in criminal jury trials where an appeal may be taken to the Court of Criminal Appeal where a transcript of the evidence would be required. This consideration does not arise in civil cases in the Circuit or District Courts since appeals from those courts involve a rehearing of the case in the High Court or Circuit Court, respectively.
The procedure in the High Court is prescribed by Order 123 of the Rules of the Superior Courts. This provides that a party may apply to the judge for an order that the proceedings be reported by a shorthand writer and the judge shall appoint a shorthand writer to take a note of the proceedings. The party applying for the appointment of a stenographer shall bear the cost unless the judge shall after the trial certify that in his or her opinion it was expedient that the proceedings should have been reported. In that case, the remuneration of the shorthand writer shall be part of the costs of the cause.
Of course, the order made by any court in a family law matter is recorded in writing and is available to the parties.
1162 Ms Shortall asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform if he has satisfied himself with the use of ex parte orders in the family law courts; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20188/03]
The issue of ex parte orders in the family law courts usually arises in the context of orders made under the Domestic Violence Acts, 1996 and 2002. These Acts provide that interim barring orders and protection orders may be granted ex parte. The 2002 Act remedied a defect in the provision in the 1996 Act relating to ex parte interim barring orders which the Supreme Court held to be unconstitutional for failing to prescribe a fixed period of relatively short duration during which the interim order would remain in force. The Supreme Court stated that it was not beyond dispute that the legislature could provide for the granting of interim barring orders on an ex parte basis. However, when such an order is made, there has to be an early return date and this is specifically provided for in the 2002 Act.
I believe that the power to grant orders ex parte is essential to protect victims of domestic violence in some situations. I will, of course, consider any suggestions that are put forward to improve the existing provisions or to remedy any defects.
