Marques -v- Director of Public Prosecutions & ors [2016] IECA 373 (12 December 2016)

Marques -v- Director of Public Prosecutions & ors [2016] IECA 373 (12 December 2016)

The DPP's decision not to prosecute the appellant is not reviewable in the absence of mala fides, improper motive, or exceptional circumstances, none of which are present. The appellant has no right to be prosecuted or to be given reasons for the decision not to prosecute, as no legal right is affected. The trial judge was correct to refuse reliefs by way of judicial review.

Citation
[2016] IECA 373
Parties
Appellant: Eric Eoin Marques; Respondents: The Director of Public Prosecutions, Ireland and the Attorney General; Notice Party: The Minister for Justice and Equality; Amicus Curiae: The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
12 December 2016
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Appeal / Appeal From High Court Refusal of Judicial Review
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Prosecutorial Discretion, Duty to Give Reasons, Reviewability of DPP Decisions, Extradition, Fair Procedures, European Convention on Human Rights
Criminal Law Extradition Law Constitutional Law Administrative Law Prosecutorial Discretion Duty to Give Reasons Reviewability of DPP Decisions Extradition +2 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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Eric Eoin Marques

Appellant

The Director of Public Prosecutions, Ireland and the Attorney General

Respondents

The Minister for Justice and Equality

Notice Party

The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission

Amicus Curiae

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Appeal / Appeal From High Court Refusal of Judicial Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the DPP's decision not to prosecute is reviewable in the circumstances
  2. 2 Whether the DPP is obliged to give reasons for the decision not to prosecute
  3. 3 Whether the appellant's constitutional or Convention rights were breached by the DPP's decision

Ratio Decidendi

The DPP's decision not to prosecute the appellant is not reviewable in the absence of mala fides, improper motive, or exceptional circumstances, none of which are present. The appellant has no right to be prosecuted or to be given reasons for the decision not to prosecute, as no legal right is affected. The trial judge was correct to refuse reliefs by way of judicial review.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Refusal of all reliefs sought by way of judicial review
  • No order quashing the DPP's decision not to prosecute