O'Regan v. D.P.P. [1999] IESC 59; [2000] 2 ILRM 68 (20th July, 1999)

O'Regan v. D.P.P. [1999] IESC 59; [2000] 2 ILRM 68 (20th July, 1999)

There is no legal obligation in summary criminal proceedings for the prosecution to call or tender all material witnesses, including those who completed statutory forms; the defence is entitled to call such witnesses if desired. The error of the trial judge in refusing to allow the defence to call Dr Prendiville was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1999] IESC 59
Parties
Appellant: Appellant (unnamed); First Named Respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions; Second Named Respondent: Judge Uinsinn MacGruairc
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (criminal) / Appeal From High Court to Supreme Court
Outcome
Appeal and cross-appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Right to Call Witnesses, Obligation to Call/tender Witnesses, Summary Trial Procedure, Costs in Judicial Review, Prohibition Order
Criminal Law Judicial Review Procedural Law Right to Call Witnesses Obligation to Call/tender Witnesses Summary Trial Procedure Costs in Judicial Review Prohibition Order

Source-derived case record

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Appellant (unnamed)

Appellant

Director of Public Prosecutions

First Named Respondent

Judge Uinsinn MacGruairc

Second Named Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review (criminal) / Appeal From High Court to Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution is obliged to call or tender all material witnesses in a criminal prosecution, specifically Dr Prendiville
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in refusing to allow the defence to call Dr Prendiville
  3. 3 Whether the error warranted prohibition of further proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

There is no legal obligation in summary criminal proceedings for the prosecution to call or tender all material witnesses, including those who completed statutory forms; the defence is entitled to call such witnesses if desired. The error of the trial judge in refusing to allow the defence to call Dr Prendiville was corrected, and thus prohibition is not warranted. Costs awarded by the High Court were a proper exercise of discretion.

Court Disposition

Appeal and cross-appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Declaration affirming right of Appellant to call Dr Prendiville as a witness in District Court proceedings
  • Refusal of order of prohibition