DPP(at the suit of Garda Richard T O Connor) v Cronin [2006] IEHC 386 (13 November 2006)

DPP(at the suit of Garda Richard T O Connor) v Cronin [2006] IEHC 386 (13 November 2006)

The use of 'exercising' instead of 'having' in the Garda's opinion did not create a material difference or prejudice, and thus was not a valid ground for dismissal of the charge.

Citation
[2006] IEHC 386
Parties
Prosecutor: Director of Public Prosecutions (at the suit of Garda Richard T. O’Connor); Accused: Brendan Cronin
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
13 November 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal by Way of Case Stated / High Court Judgment on Case Stated
Outcome
District Court judge was not correct in dismissing the charge; charge should not have been dismissed.
Legal Topics
Drink Driving, Interpretation of Statutory Language, Dismissal of Charges
Criminal Law Road Traffic Law Drink Driving Interpretation of Statutory Language Dismissal of Charges

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 1 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Director of Public Prosecutions (at the suit of Garda Richard T. O’Connor)

Prosecutor

Brendan Cronin

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal by Way of Case Stated / High Court Judgment on Case Stated

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the use of the word 'exercising' instead of 'having' in the arresting Garda's opinion invalidates the charge under s. 49(1)(a) of the Road Traffic Act 1961

Ratio Decidendi

The use of 'exercising' instead of 'having' in the Garda's opinion did not create a material difference or prejudice, and thus was not a valid ground for dismissal of the charge.

Court Disposition

District Court judge was not correct in dismissing the charge; charge should not have been dismissed.