Oates -v- District Judge Browne & another [2016] IESC 7 (29 February 2016)

Oates -v- District Judge Browne & another [2016] IESC 7 (29 February 2016)

The refusal by the District Judge to allow inspection of the Intoxilyser machine and related documentation, without giving any reasons despite specific request, constituted a breach of fair procedures and constitutional justice. The right to apply for such inspection is essential to ensure that the statutory presumption regarding the Intoxilyser printout is rebuttable in reality, not merely in theory. The District Judge's error regarding the status of McGonnell v. Attorney General further undermined the lawfulness of the refusal. Accordingly, the conviction was quashed and the appeal allowed.

Citation
[2016] IESC 7
Parties
Applicant/appellant: Michael Oates; Respondent: District Judge Geoffrey Browne; Notice Party/respondent: The Director of Public Prosecutions
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
29 February 2016
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Dismissal of Judicial Review Application
Outcome
Appeal allowed; conviction quashed
Legal Topics
Fair Procedures, Due Process, Drink Driving Offences, Evidential Breath Testing, Judicial Discretion, Right to Contest Evidence
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Administrative Law Fair Procedures Due Process Drink Driving Offences Evidential Breath Testing Judicial Discretion +1 more

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

Michael Oates

Applicant/appellant

District Judge Geoffrey Browne

Respondent

The Director of Public Prosecutions

Notice Party/respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Dismissal of Judicial Review Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether refusal to allow inspection of the Intoxilyser machine and related documentation to the defence in a drink driving prosecution breaches fair procedures and constitutional justice
  2. 2 Whether the District Judge's failure to give reasons for refusal of inspection/application is a breach of fair procedures
  3. 3 Whether the statutory presumption regarding Intoxilyser printouts is rebuttable 'in reality' without such inspection

Ratio Decidendi

The refusal by the District Judge to allow inspection of the Intoxilyser machine and related documentation, without giving any reasons despite specific request, constituted a breach of fair procedures and constitutional justice. The right to apply for such inspection is essential to ensure that the statutory presumption regarding the Intoxilyser printout is rebuttable in reality, not merely in theory. The District Judge's error regarding the status of McGonnell v. Attorney General further undermined the lawfulness of the refusal. Accordingly, the conviction was quashed and the appeal allowed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; conviction quashed

Orders

  • Order of the High Court set aside
  • Conviction of the applicant quashed