D.P.P. -v- Moorehouse [2005] IESC 52 (28 July 2005)

D.P.P. -v- Moorehouse [2005] IESC 52 (28 July 2005)

Section 13(2) of the Road Traffic Act, 1994, does not create an offence for failure to comply with the requirement to provide breath specimens in the manner indicated by a Garda; the offence is limited to refusal or failure to comply with the requirement itself. However, merely exhaling into the apparatus is not sufficient compliance unless it enables the concentration of alcohol in the breath to be determined.

Citation
[2005] IESC 52
Parties
Complainant: Director of Public Prosecutions; Defendant: Bridget Moorehouse
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
28 July 2005
Procedural Posture
Case Stated (appeal) / Supreme Court Determination of Questions of Law From Circuit Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed; first question answered 'No', second question clarified that mere exhaling is insufficient unless the concentration of alcohol can be determined.
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Penal Statutes, Breath Specimen Requirements, Failure to Comply With Garda Instructions, Statutory Construction
Criminal Law Road Traffic Law Interpretation of Penal Statutes Breath Specimen Requirements Failure to Comply With Garda Instructions Statutory Construction

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

Parties

Director of Public Prosecutions

Complainant

Bridget Moorehouse

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Case Stated (appeal) / Supreme Court Determination of Questions of Law From Circuit Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does s. 13(2) of the Road Traffic Act, 1994, make it an offence to refuse or fail to comply with the requirement to provide breath specimens in the manner outlined by a Garda?
  2. 2 Is merely exhaling into the apparatus sufficient compliance with the requirement under s. 13(1)(a)?

Ratio Decidendi

Section 13(2) of the Road Traffic Act, 1994, does not create an offence for failure to comply with the requirement to provide breath specimens in the manner indicated by a Garda; the offence is limited to refusal or failure to comply with the requirement itself. However, merely exhaling into the apparatus is not sufficient compliance unless it enables the concentration of alcohol in the breath to be determined.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; first question answered 'No', second question clarified that mere exhaling is insufficient unless the concentration of alcohol can be determined.

Orders

  • First question of law answered in the negative: s. 13(2) does not make it an offence to fail to comply in the manner indicated by the Garda.
  • Second question answered: merely exhaling into the apparatus is not sufficient compliance unless the concentration of alcohol in the breath can be determined.