By Mark Tottenham BL in Birmingham J No Comments Tags: Criminal judicial review, Drink driving
Keegan v. Judge Kilrane [2011] IEHC 516
(High Court, Birmingham J, 26 October 2011)
High Court quashes drink driving conviction on grounds that judge should have recused himself, having acted for accused as solicitor. (Full text.)
Judicial review – conviction of drink driving – failure of judge to recuse himself – objective bias – judge acted for accused when a solicitor – delay in seeking relief – whether trial judge entitled to conclude that application to recuse made More
By Mark Tottenham BL in Hedigan J No Comments Tags: Criminal law, Drink driving
DPP v.Kulimushi [2011] IEHC 476
(High Court, Hedigan J, 16 December 2011)
High Court holds by way of case stated from District Court that Garda had formed valid opinion to arrest accused for drink driving. (Full text.)
Criminal law – case stated from District Court – drink driving – whether Garda formed valid opinion to arrest accused – whether trial judge correct in dismissing case – opinion based on preliminary breath test – requirements to form reasonable More
By Mark Tottenham BL in Hardiman J No Comments Tags: Criminal law, Drink driving, Rules of evidence
DPP v. Ennis [2011] IESC 46
(Supreme Court, Hardiman J (nem diss), 6 December 2011)
Supreme Court holds, in answer to case stated from Circuit Court (Judge O’Sullivan), that: a) an arrest for drink driving might be lawful in the absence of the statute being invoked; b) an evidential burden on the accused might be discharged by reliance on prosecution evidence; and c) that if a statutory presumption is rebutted, a statement relying on said presumption was without evidential value. (Full text.)
Drink driving – case stated from Circuit Court (on rehearing from District Court) – s 49, Road Traffic Act 1961 (as amended) – whether accused lawfully arrested – whether accused specifically informed that he was being arrested More
By Mark Tottenham BL in Kearns P No Comments Tags: Criminal law, Drink driving
DPP v. Nash [2011] IEHC 418
(High Court, Kearns P, 16 November 2011)
High Court holds, by way of case stated, that District Court was incorrect in dismissing drink driving charge arising from evidence of humidity in room. (Full text.)
Case stated – drink driving – s 49, Road Traffic Act 1961, as amended – dismissal of charge – humidity in room of 26% – presumption as to content of s 17 certificate – prosecution refused right to call rebuttal evidence – whether More
By Mark Tottenham BL in O'Keeffe J No Comments Tags: Criminal judicial review, Drink driving
Dowling v. Judge Brennan [2010] IEHC 522
(High Court, O’Keeffe J, 11 November 2010)
Court refuses judicial review of conviction of first named applicant on charge of drink driving, and application to restrain trials of three further applicants, on grounds of failure to disclose material relevant to intoxiliser. (Full text.)
Judicial review – conviction of drink driving of first applicant – application to restrain further prosecution of other three applicants – failure to disclose documents relating to intoxiliser – s. 49(4) of the Road Traffic Act 1961 (as amended) – s 17(2), Road Traffic Act 1994 – provision More
By Mark Tottenham BL in Hedigan J No Comments Tags: Criminal judicial review, Drink driving
Mooney v. Judge Ann Watkin [2011] IEHC 288 (13 July 2011)
High Court (Hedigan J) grants order of certiorari of applicant’s conviction for drink driving offence, and places stay on any further proceedings. (Full text.)
Judicial review – conviction and sentence in District Court on drink driving offenses – alleged offence in 2004 – issue of bench warrant – warrant executed in 2009 – prosecution unable to proceed at hearing in October 2009, or on adjourned date of December 2009 before Judge O’Neill – adjourned to date in February 2010 before Judge Watkin – refusal to strike out on grounds of delay – whether sitting judge had full jurisdiction to decide on application, or was fettered by previous decision of court – delay – balancing exercise – lack of explanation for delay in executing warrant – obligation on courts to ensure that matters determined within a reasonable time – alternative remedy.
Smith v. Judge Thomas O’Donnell & DPP (Unreported, High Court, 27th April, 2004)
Corporation of Dublin v Flynn [1980] IR 357
DPP v Cormack and Farrell [2009] 2 IR 408
Barker v. Wingo (1972) 407 U.S. 514
DPP v P O’C (Unreported, Supreme Court, 27th July, 2006)
Kenneally v The DPP [2010] IEHC 183
DPP v Judge McDonnell & James Gallagher (Unreported, High Court, 26th May, 2006)
Kay v Lambeth London Borough Council [2006] 2 AC 465
DPP (Kenny) v Doyle [2007] 3 IR 89
Dunne v DPP (High Court, unreported, 6th June, 1996)
Gilroy v. Flynn [2005] 1 ILRM 294
By Mark Tottenham BL in Sheehan J No Comments Tags: Case stated, Criminal law, Drink driving, Practice and procedure
DPP v. Furlong [2011] IEHC 284 (9 June 2011)
High Court (Sheehan J) finds that issue of a summons in drink driving case was abuse of process, where seven related summonses were issued in a different District Court area, and holds that the District Judge did not have jurisdiction to hear the case. (Full text.)
Consultative case stated from District Court – s. 13(3) of the Road Traffic Act 1994 (as amended) – charge with refusal to give a breath specimen – reissue of seven summonses for various road traffic offences including drink driving and refusal to give specimen arising from same arrest – seven summonses struck out – eighth summons to different District Court area – delay of 18 months between incident and service of summonses – whether abuse of process – whether any reason for failure to bring all charges together in one location
The State (at the Prosecution of Robert Trimbole) v. The Governor of Mountjoy Prison [ 1985] 1 I.R. 550
Director of Public Prosecutions v. O Donnell [1995] 2 I.R. 294
Director of Public Prosecutions v. Cronin (Ex tempore, High Court, Geoghegan J., 25th July, 1994)
Cormack v. Director of Public Prosecutions & Farrell v. Director of Public Prosecutions [2008] I.E.S.C. 63
R v. Horseferry Road Magistrates’ Court, ex parte Bennett [1994] 1 A.C. 42
Director of Public Prosecutions v. Nevin [2003] 3 I.R. 321
R. v. Fernandez [1997] 1 Cr. App. R. 123
O’Leary v. Cunningham [1980] 1 I.R. 367
Cormack v. Director of Public Prosecutions & Farrell v. Director of Public Prosecutions [2008] I.E.S.C. 63
By Mark Tottenham BL in Hedigan J No Comments Tags: Case stated, Criminal law, Drink driving
DPP v. Gillespie [2011] IEHC 236 (9 June 2011)
High Court (Hedigan J) holds that question posed in consultative case stated is one of fact rather than law, and remits issue to District Court to determine whether there was in fact a breach of custody regulations. (Full text.)
Criminal law – drink driving – District Court – consultative case stated – admissibility of evidence – whether judge entitled to exercise discretion to exclude evidence – prisoner on telephone when being given information in accordance with custody regulations – Criminal Justice Act 1984 (Treatment of Persons in Custody in Garda Síochána Stations) Regulations 1987 – procedure for consultative case stated – whether question was one of fact rather than law.
Walsh v. District Judge O’Buachalla [1991] 1 I.R. 56
DPP v Spratt [1995] 1 I.R. 585
DPP v. Diver [2005] 3 I.R. 271
DPP (Travers) v. Brennan[1998] 4 I.R. 67
By Mark Tottenham BL in Hogan J No Comments Tags: Criminal judicial review, Drink driving
Maher -v- Judge Kennedy [2011] IEHC 207 (6 May 2011)
High Court (Hogan J) grants certiorari of drink driving conviction by reason of failure to give reasons for refusal to dismiss prosecution and perception of bias. (Full text.)
Judicial review – conviction of drink driving – s. 49(3) of the Road Traffic Act 1961 – whether authorisation was defective – failure to give adequate reasons for decision – description of accused submissions as “rubbish” – claim by judge that he had “no time for these technical drink driving points”.
Fitzwilton v. Mahon [2007] IESC 27, [2008] 1 I.R. 712 at 730
Monaghan UDC v. Alf-A-Bet Promotions Ltd. [1980] I.L.R.M. 64
Albatros Feeds v. Minister for Agriculture and Food [2006] IESC 52, [2007] 1 I.R. 221
Croadaun Homes Ltd. v. Kildare County Council [1983] I.L.R.M. 1
The People v. Mallon, 8th March, 2011
Fogarty v. Judge O’Donnell [2008] IEHC 198
Bula Ltd. v. Tara Mines Ltd.(No. 6) [2000] 4 I.R. 412
President of the Republic of South Africa v. South African Rugby Football Union 1999 (4) S.A. 147
By Mark Tottenham BL in Peart J No Comments Tags: Drink driving, Judicial review
Bailey -v- Judge Browne [2011] IEHC 153 (Peart J, 14 March 2011)
High Court refuses judicial review of drink driving conviction. (Full text.)
Judicial review – conviction for drink driving – whether Garda entitled to give evidence of warning by reference to legislation rather than from memory – whether evidence that warning not given properly while applicant in Garda station – whether District Judge acted in manner inappropriate, improper or partial.
DPP v. Clifford [2002] WJSC-HC 1899
Dineen v. Delap [1994] 2 I.R. 228