Tracey Gilligan wins court case claiming Cab mishandled her welfare claims – The Irish Times

Tracey Gilligan, daughter of convicted drug dealer John Gilligan, won her case arguing that the Criminal Assets Bureau (CAB) mishandled her welfare claims.

Justice Garrett Simons ruled on Thursday that it was unlawful for the Cab, in accepting jurisdiction over her claims, to have relied on a 1998 ministerial certificate in another welfare application made by Ms Gilligan.

To return a request to the office, the Minister of Social Protection must provide a new certificate on the perceived risks associated with this “particular” claim, the judge ruled.

The ACR Act allows the minister to refer a request to the office if she certifies that there are “reasonable grounds to believe” that her agents “could be subject to threats or other forms of intimidation” when investigating the complaint.

In her judicial review filing, Ms Gilligan said she was not involved in any criminal activity and did not understand why she was being treated as if she was. She claimed that the Cab had acted illegally in opening its investigation into her claims for disability and additional welfare benefits.

Describing herself as a housewife living in Elphin, Co Roscommon, Ms Gilligan claimed she was treated differently because of her family connections.

His father John (72) was once one of the Republic’s biggest drug importers. He was accused of murdering journalist Veronica Guerin in 1996 but was acquitted. He was convicted of drug charges and released from prison in October 2013.

Ms Gilligan’s recent applications for disability and additional welfare payments were rejected in June 2023 and these decisions were upheld five months later.

His proceedings asked the High Court to overturn decisions refusing to review his welfare applications through the standard mechanism.

In court on Thursday, lead barrister Shane Murphy, of the Cab and States Parties, said his clients, in accepting his applications fell within the office’s jurisdiction, were relying on a 1998 ministerial certificate in another application that she had filed.

Derek Shortall, instructed by Staunton Caulfield & Co, argued that this approach was unlawful, as re-certification is required for each application.

He said his client was not given adequate explanations as to why her requests were transferred to the office.

In handing down his ruling after hearing the case on Thursday morning, Justice Simons said “the relevant law is clear and there is no doubt as to its interpretation.” He said an individualized decision must be made for each request.

Various constitutional points were raised, but he did not need to rule on them, he said. A written judgment will be issued in the coming weeks, he said, expecting the case to return to court at the end of the month.