A former Cloverhill inmate who says a needle pierced his hand during a football game on the jail’s Astroturf pitch has secured discovery of internal prison policies, after a District Court judge ruled the documents were directly relevant to his negligence claim.
The motion was heard against the backdrop of fresh security concerns at Mountjoy Prison, where Dublin Councillor Gayle Ralph recently reported individuals flying drones equipped with flaming buckets from a laneway beside Whitworth Road.
Thomas Redmond, who was classed as an enhanced prisoner at the time, told the court he fell during a match and struck a needle hidden in the surface.
He was taken to hospital and received two hepatitis‑related injections. He is suing the Irish Prison Service for personal injuries.
His barrister, Conor Duff BL, said the case turns on the distinction between enhanced prisoners and ordinary inmates.
Enhanced prisoners are drug‑free and allowed use of certain recreational facilities, including the Astroturf pitch.
He argued the pitch should have been kept free of drug paraphernalia and that other classes of prisoners should not have had access to it.
The Prison Service has filed a full defence. It denies negligence and says regular inspections of the pitch were carried out.
The matter came before Judge O’Connell on a motion for discovery. Most categories had been agreed, but two remained in dispute.
Mr Redmond sought all policies governing use of the Astroturf pitch by enhanced and non‑enhanced prisoners.
He also sought documents relating to the incentivised regime for enhanced prisoners under a 2012 policy.
Counsel for the Prison Service opposed the second request. She said the incentivised‑regime material was too broad and not tied to the pleaded issues.
She argued the case concerned what happened on the pitch on the day of the incident, not wider incentive schemes.
Judge O’Connell granted discovery of the Astroturf‑use policies, saying they were relevant to the question of who should have had access to the pitch. He refused the request for incentivised‑regime documents, finding it too expansive.
Mr Duff applied for costs, saying the motion had been necessary.
The judge declined, noting the claimant had been only partly successful.
The case will return to court once the ordered discovery has been completed.