D.P.P. v. Cabot [2004] IEHC 79 (20 April 2004)
There is no statutory or constitutional obligation on Gardaí to inform an arrested person that a special and substantial reason for refusal to provide breath specimens is not a defence unless the person also complies with or offers to comply with a requirement to provide blood or urine. The only requirement is to inform the accused that refusal may constitute an offence. The first question is answered in the negative and the second does not arise.
- Citation
- [2004] IEHC 79
- Parties
- Prosecutor: Director of Public Prosecutions; Accused: Redmond Cabot
- Jurisdiction
- Ireland
- Judgment Date
- 20 April 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Case Stated (consultative) From District Court / High Court Determination of Consultative Case Stated
- Outcome
- First question answered in the negative; second question does not arise.
- Legal Topics
- Refusal to Provide Breath Specimen, Procedural Fairness, Defences Under Road Traffic Act, Obligation to Inform Accused of Defences
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Director of Public Prosecutions
Prosecutor
Redmond Cabot
Accused
Procedural Posture
Case Stated (consultative) From District Court / High Court Determination of Consultative Case Stated
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether Gardaí are obliged to inform an arrested person that a special and substantial reason for refusing to provide breath specimens is not a defence unless the person complies with or offers to comply with a requirement to provide blood or urine
- 2 Whether prosecution must prove the accused was so informed
Ratio Decidendi
There is no statutory or constitutional obligation on Gardaí to inform an arrested person that a special and substantial reason for refusal to provide breath specimens is not a defence unless the person also complies with or offers to comply with a requirement to provide blood or urine. The only requirement is to inform the accused that refusal may constitute an offence. The first question is answered in the negative and the second does not arise.
Court Disposition
First question answered in the negative; second question does not arise.
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