Director of Public Prosecutions -v- T. F., [2021] IECA 120, April 19, 2021, at paragraphs 21 and 22:

The second ground of complaint was:

“That the learned trial Judge erred in law and in fact in ruling that the prosecution were allowed to lead evidence from Mr [X] to the effect that the reason for his delay in making the complaint was because he had spent years suffering from mental health issues”.

It must be said that this ground was not pressed with any vigour and understandably so, and it should be noted that we deal with it now only for the sake of completeness. The original suggestion had seemed to be that the complainant was, in effect, allowed to give expert evidence about his own health and to attribute the delay in making a complaint to the difficulties that he says he experienced.

We do not believe there is any reason why someone cannot speak about their own health. While it goes without saying that they may not be in a position to offer a formal detailed diagnosis, we cannot see any reason why a witness cannot say, “I was experiencing mental health difficulties over a particular period”, or, “I was experiencing restricted mobility To the extent that the appeal ground remains live, we dismiss it.