Nikita Hand has lodged a new civil action against former MMA fighter Conor McGregor as well as a couple he intended to call to give evidence in his appeal, before he withdrew the application in what were described as "mysterious circumstances".
Ms Hand is suing Mr McGregor as well as Samantha O'Reilly and Steven Cummins for damages in an action filed yesterday.
It is understood that she alleges they engaged in malicious abuse of the process of the court.
Mr McGregor lost his appeal against a High Court jury’s finding that he raped Ms Hand in a hotel in Dublin in December 2018.
He had intended to call evidence from Ms O’Reilly and Mr Cummins, who claimed they were former neighbours and had suggested that Ms Hand’s former boyfriend attacked her after she had been out with Mr McGregor on 9 December 2018.
Mr McGregor said this would have provided a "plausible explanation" for the bruising on her body, which he claimed he did not cause.
Ms Hand said the statements were lies.
But this ground of appeal was abandoned on the morning the appeal was due to begin.
The Court of Appeal said the application to introduce fresh evidence was abandoned in "somewhat mysterious" circumstances with no plausible reason given.
It awarded Ms Hand costs in relation to this issue at the highest possible level.
It said Ms Hand had been completely vindicated and Mr McGregor’s conduct in publicly calling into question the correctness of the jury’s verdict and Ms Hand’s testimony should be marked by a palpable sign of the court’s displeasure and disapproval.
The court has already referred the matter to the Director of Public Prosecutions to investigate possible perjury.
Giving the court’s ruling, Mr Justice Brian O’Moore said the abandonment by Mr McGregor of this application could only be seen by the court as an acknowledgment that Ms Hand was correct.
He said her lawyers had not been exaggerating when they said this "new evidence" had put Ms Hand through the wringer.
The judge said Ms Hand had prevailed in one of the most hard fought trials of recent years.
The jury believed her but their belief that she had been raped had been subject to a root and branch attack in this appeal by the deploying of the "new evidence".
He said it was difficult to see why Ms Hand should have any liability for costs in respect to this aspect of the appeal.
She was awarded her costs in this matter on a "legal practitioner and own client basis" - the highest possible basis on which a court can award costs.
The court also dismissed Mr McGregor’s remaining grounds of appeal in their entirety. It found that the jurors were not concerned about the type of assault they had to decide on and could have been in no doubt that they were answering a question about a rape.
Mr Justice O’Moore said it was simply unreal to suggest that any member of the jury became confused about the meaning of the question after the judge framed the issue in a "brutally clear" way.
The court also ruled that the jurors had been given sufficient warnings about evidence that Mr McGregor had answered "no comment" around 100 times to gardaí when he was questioned about the rape.
The appeals court subsequently rejected an appeal by Mr McGregor’s friend James Lawrence that he should have been awarded his costs.
It said parts of his evidence supporting Mr McGregor were untruthful and giving such evidence was a very serious matter,
It also said his costs were being paid by Mr McGregor in an arrangement "shrouded in mystery".
It said if Mr Lawrence were granted his costs and then repaid them to his friend, Ms Hand would be making a payment to someone who gave inaccurate evidence against her and ultimately to the man who raped her.
Mr McGregor criticised this decision on social media and claimed he would not be paying Mr Lawrence's costs.
He also said he believed the two witnesses did not know why they had not been called and criticised his own legal team for pulling them.
He said he was happy this was still ongoing and said he would fight on.
Speaking outside court, Ms Hand said the appeal had "retraumatised" her "over and over again".
She said being forced to relive the rape had a huge impact on her.
She thanked everyone who had supported her and believed in her, and urged survivors not to be silenced.
She said the Court of Appeal’s decision meant she could finally move on and try to heal.
Watch: 'I can finally move on' - Nikita Hand after ruling
Mr McGregor will have to seek the permission of the Supreme Court to take a further appeal.
The Supreme Court will only allow an appeal if it decides that it raises a point of law of general public importance or if decides it is in the interests of justice to do so.
The legal term is now over, but the Four Courts will be lit up in purple tonight, partly in tribute to Ms Hand.
The Dublin Rape Crisis Centre (DRCC) is launching a campaign called "Lights of Hope" during which 15 public buildings in Dublin, Tipperary and Kilkenny will glow purple from dusk to dawn until 15 August.
It said the campaign is to honour and support survivors of sexual violence.
Lighting up the Four Cours marks the end of what it called "a gruelling legal term" which saw many harrowing cases of sexual violence as well as the conclusion of the appeal in Ms Hand’s case.
The DRCC said that it also wants to remind the wider public of the need for solidarity with survivors and for awareness and action in addressing sexual violence.
We need your consent to load this rte-player contentWe use rte-player to manage extra content that can set cookies on your device and collect data about your activity. Please review their details and accept them to load the content.Manage Preferences
