M (Suing by His mother and next friend J) v Director of Oberstown Children's Detention Centre & Ors (Approved)

2.������ In the course of this appeal, an order was made prohibiting the publication or broadcast of anything that would, or would be likely to, identify the appellant.

4.������ He deposed to a lack of procedural safeguards surrounding the separation measures:-

�������������� ��The Applicant has not been provided with any formal written decision containing adequate reasons regarding the imposition and continuation of this punishment regime. �was denied an opportunity to make representations in respect of this punishment regime. �was denied an opportunity to appeal the decision to subject him to this punishment regime. �has not been informed of the proposed duration of the punishment and is consequently subject to an indefinite period of segregation.� (para. 15)

5.������ Mr. Kenny exhibited email correspondence of 18 September 2018 between himself and Mr. Pat Bergin, the Director of Oberstown, relating to the separation measures in question in which the Director explained that the appellant was not being punished but rather was being assisted with the management of his behaviour. Mr. Kenny also referred to earlier email exchanges with the Director in relation to separation measures imposed on the appellant previously in July and August 2018.

6.������ At para. 17 Mr. Kenny characterised the July and August 2018 separation measures applied by Oberstown to the appellant as his having been �subjected to this ad hoc punishment while in detention.�