The Supreme Court has reinstated an effective 10-year jail sentence imposed on a man for raping his wife.

Previously the Court of Appeal had cut the sentence to eight and a half years but this was appealed by the DPP to the Supreme Court.

The rape happened after the man forced his wife upstairs at knifepoint. He made threats to kill her after she left their home the following day with their young child and, some weeks later, attacked her, and her mother, with a hammer while she was in her parents' home.

Mr Justice Peter Charleton said the circumstances of this rape included the domination of the woman who was entitled instead to repose trust in her husband, the "chilling threat of violence", the betrayal of the sanctity of the home and the "incipient menace" that effectively kept her captive overnight and worried about her responsibilities as a mother, he said.

This was a case correctly characterised by the trial judge, Ms Justice Isobel Kennedy, as being in the "upper bracket of the more serious category of rape cases", he said.

The DPP had appealed to the Supreme Court after an effective 10-year sentence previously imposed by the Central Criminal Court for the rape was reduced to eight and a half years by the Court of Appeal.

The DPP argued the appeal court had erred in apparently regarding the rape as an offence "in isolation" rather than part of a pattern of violent and abusive behaviour.

The appeal concerned the rape sentence only and did not concern concurrent sentences imposed for threats by the man to kill the woman and a hammer attack by him on her some days after the rape.

The Supreme Court gave an earlier significant judgment in the case which addressed sentencing in rape cases, particularly of marital rape involving a pattern of violent and abusive behaviour.

It later heard submissions as to the appropriate sentence in light of those principles.

Today, the five-judge court, sitting for the first time ever in Kilkenny courthouse, gave its judgment on sentence.

Mr Justice Charleton, giving the judgment, said no error in the trial judge's sentencing had been identified and it followed the original sentence should be restored, he said.

There was no basis for affording any reduction in that sentence by reason of the appeal even though time has passed, he added.

'Huge relief'

Speaking after the judgment, the woman said the Supreme Court decision was a "huge relief" for herself and her family and would have very important implications for future cases of domestic and sexual violence.

"The Supreme Court has said very clearly these offences are very serious and has set out how they should be addressed," she said.

She and her family have been down a long road but she was "very glad" the DPP had pursued this matter because it was "the right thing to do and that is proven by the judgment".

The woman was married to the man, from an African country, for some years ago and they had a child before their relationship deteriorated. On May 2, 2014, after a major row involving an altercation, they agreed to separate.

On May 25, 2014, during a row in the kitchen, the man produced a knife, threatened his wife he would "cut open" her face, ordered her upstairs and raped her. He told her, if she rang gardaí, they would not arrive in time to save her.

She pretended reconciliation, left the next morning and got protection orders. He rang and threatened to kill her the next day and, over ensuing days, confronted her at work, the crèche and at a shopping centre.

On August 6, 2014, her mother let him into her parents home where he produced a hammer from a bag, struck the woman several times on the head and also hit her mother on the head. He fled after neighbours intervened and was later arrested.

The woman suffered three deep lacerations and she and her mother were taken to hospital.

The man was convicted of charges related to the hammer attack, rape and three threats to kill and concurrent sentences were imposed. A 14-year “headline” sentence was imposed for the rape, reduced by two years suspension and two years for mitigation, resulting in total prison time of 10 years.

The Court of Appeal reduced the headline rape sentence to 12 years, less two for mitigation and 18 months for suspension, making the overall sentence eight years and six months.

In the Supreme Court's earlier December judgment, Mr Justice Charleton set out principles for sentencing in rape cases and the sentencing bands for such cases.

He said rape ordinarily merits a substantial "headline" sentence of about seven years before mitigation is considered and a custodial sentence "is all but inescapable".

A category of cases merit a headline sentence of 10-15 years, before considering mitigation and suspension issues and violence in the home, breach of trust, domination and a background of abuse are "aggravating circumstances".

Some cases would require up to life imprisonment and particular emphasis would be placed on the harm rape does to the victim, he added.