Reade v Judge Reilly & Anor [2009] IESC 66 (31 July 2009)

Reade v Judge Reilly & Anor [2009] IESC 66 (31 July 2009)

The District Judge is not bound by the DPP's decision to prosecute hybrid offences summarily and must decline jurisdiction if the facts disclose a non-minor offence; there is no statutory power for the District Judge to send the accused forward for trial or direct service of a book of evidence in such cases; the only available action is to strike out the proceedings.

Citation
[2009] IESC 66
Parties
Applicant/appellant: Aidan Reade; First Respondent: Judge Reilly; Second Respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
31 July 2009
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Refusal of Reliefs
Outcome
Appeal dismissed in part; declaration granted in part
Legal Topics
Hybrid Offences, District Court Jurisdiction, Summary Vs Indictable Offences, Fair Procedures, Delegation of Prosecutorial Discretion
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Judicial Review Hybrid Offences District Court Jurisdiction Summary Vs Indictable Offences Fair Procedures Delegation of Prosecutorial Discretion

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 3 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Aidan Reade

Applicant/appellant

Judge Reilly

First Respondent

Director of Public Prosecutions

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Refusal of Reliefs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the District Judge is bound by the DPP's decision to prosecute hybrid offences summarily or may decline jurisdiction if the offence is non-minor
  2. 2 Whether the District Judge has statutory power to send an accused forward for trial on indictment or to direct service of a book of evidence in hybrid offence cases where jurisdiction is declined
  3. 3 Whether fair procedures require the District Judge to be bound by an initial decision to try summarily absent new evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The District Judge is not bound by the DPP's decision to prosecute hybrid offences summarily and must decline jurisdiction if the facts disclose a non-minor offence; there is no statutory power for the District Judge to send the accused forward for trial or direct service of a book of evidence in such cases; the only available action is to strike out the proceedings.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed in part; declaration granted in part

Orders

  • Order of the High Court refusing judicial review affirmed; District Judge was correct in declining jurisdiction for non-minor offence
  • Declaration granted that the District Judge does not have power to adjourn for service of a book of evidence in such circumstances