Director of Public Prosecutions v Hannaway (Approved) [2021] IESC 31 (04 May 2021)

Director of Public Prosecutions v Hannaway (Approved) [2021] IESC 31 (04 May 2021)

The Criminal Justice (Surveillance) Act 2009, properly interpreted, permits the use, processing, and presentation of surveillance recordings as evidence in criminal trials, and the absence of ministerial regulations under s.10 does not render such evidence inadmissible. Section 10 concerns storage and access outside the context of criminal investigation, not the admissibility or processing of evidence for prosecution. The appeal is dismissed and the convictions affirmed.

Citation
[2021] IESC 31
Parties
Prosecutor/respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions; Accused/appellant: Seán Hannaway; Accused/appellant: Edward O’Brien; Accused/appellant: David Nooney; Accused/appellant: Kevin Hannaway; Accused/appellant: Eva Shannon
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
04 May 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From Special Criminal Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; convictions and sentences affirmed.
Legal Topics
Surveillance Evidence, Admissibility of Evidence, Statutory Construction, Criminal Justice (surveillance) Act 2009, Constitutional Law
Criminal Law Evidence Statutory Interpretation Surveillance Evidence Admissibility of Evidence Statutory Construction Criminal Justice (surveillance) Act 2009 Constitutional Law

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Director of Public Prosecutions

Prosecutor/respondent

Seán Hannaway

Accused/appellant

Edward O’Brien

Accused/appellant

David Nooney

Accused/appellant

Kevin Hannaway

Accused/appellant

Eva Shannon

Accused/appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From Special Criminal Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Criminal Justice (Surveillance) Act 2009 permits the use and processing of surveillance recordings as evidence in criminal trials absent ministerial regulations under s.10
  2. 2 Whether the absence of such regulations renders the evidence inadmissible
  3. 3 Proper statutory interpretation of the Act regarding storage, access, and use of surveillance data

Ratio Decidendi

The Criminal Justice (Surveillance) Act 2009, properly interpreted, permits the use, processing, and presentation of surveillance recordings as evidence in criminal trials, and the absence of ministerial regulations under s.10 does not render such evidence inadmissible. Section 10 concerns storage and access outside the context of criminal investigation, not the admissibility or processing of evidence for prosecution. The appeal is dismissed and the convictions affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; convictions and sentences affirmed.

Orders

  • Order of conviction and sentence by the Special Criminal Court affirmed.