D.P.P. (Harrington) v. Kilbride [1999] IEHC 111; [1999] 1 ILRM 452 (22nd February, 1999)

D.P.P. (Harrington) v. Kilbride [1999] IEHC 111; [1999] 1 ILRM 452 (22nd February, 1999)

The delay in prosecution, though regrettable, did not amount to specific prejudice or an infringement of the accused's constitutional rights, as there was no evidence of impairment to the defence or health, and mere anxiety and concern, even if prolonged, was insufficient to warrant dismissal of the charge.

Citation
[1999] IEHC 111
Parties
Accused: Mr. Liam Kilbride; Prosecutor: Director of Public Prosecutions
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Procedural Posture
Case Stated (criminal) / High Court Review of District Court Consultative Case Stated
Outcome
Charge not dismissed; question answered in the negative.
Legal Topics
Delay in Criminal Prosecution, Right to Fair Trial, Reasonable Expedition, Dismissal for Delay
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Delay in Criminal Prosecution Right to Fair Trial Reasonable Expedition Dismissal for Delay

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr. Liam Kilbride

Accused

Director of Public Prosecutions

Prosecutor

Procedural Posture

Case Stated (criminal) / High Court Review of District Court Consultative Case Stated

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the delay in prosecution warranted dismissal of the charge against the accused on grounds of unreasonable and unconscionable delay

Ratio Decidendi

The delay in prosecution, though regrettable, did not amount to specific prejudice or an infringement of the accused's constitutional rights, as there was no evidence of impairment to the defence or health, and mere anxiety and concern, even if prolonged, was insufficient to warrant dismissal of the charge.

Court Disposition

Charge not dismissed; question answered in the negative.

Orders

  • The circumstances do not disclose such unreasonable delay as would warrant dismissal of the charge.