Murphy v Director of Public Prosecutions
The appeal was dismissed because the delay did not render a fair trial impossible, the defendant was not entitled to secondary disclosure of material not in the prosecution's possession, the breathalyser device was of an approved type, and there was no obligation to adduce the roadside test result.
- Parties
- Claimant: Gerard Murphy; Defendant: Director of Public Prosecutions
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 20 June 2006
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal (case Stated) / High Court Appeal From Magistrates' Court
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Abuse of Process, Disclosure Obligations, Type Approval of Breathalysers, Delay in Criminal Proceedings, Evidential Requirements for Breath Tests
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Gerard Murphy
Claimant
Director of Public Prosecutions
Defendant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (case Stated) / High Court Appeal From Magistrates' Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether proceedings should have been stayed for abuse of process due to delay
- 2 Whether the defendant was entitled to secondary disclosure of unused material
- 3 Whether the breathalyser device was of an approved type and had approved software
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal was dismissed because the delay did not render a fair trial impossible, the defendant was not entitled to secondary disclosure of material not in the prosecution's possession, the breathalyser device was of an approved type, and there was no obligation to adduce the roadside test result.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment