Director of Public Prosecutions -v- Forsey [2016] IECA 233 (29 July 2016)

Director of Public Prosecutions -v- Forsey [2016] IECA 233 (29 July 2016)

Section 4 of the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act 2001 imposes a legal burden on the accused to disprove the presumption of corruption on the balance of probabilities. The trial judge's direction to the jury was correct in law. The acts alleged were sufficiently connected to the appellant's office as a member of Dungarvan UDC. The grounds advanced on appeal were not raised at trial and do not warrant overturning the conviction. Even if there was an error, no miscarriage of justice occurred and the proviso would apply.

Citation
[2016] IECA 233
Parties
Prosecutor/respondent: The People (at the suit of the Director of Public Prosecutions); Appellant: Fred Forsey
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
29 July 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence at Waterford Circuit Criminal Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction affirmed
Legal Topics
Corruption, Burden of Proof, Statutory Presumptions, Presumption of Innocence, Reverse Onus, Planning Law, Public Office Misconduct
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Human Rights Law Corruption Burden of Proof Statutory Presumptions Presumption of Innocence Reverse Onus +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 25 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The People (at the suit of the Director of Public Prosecutions)

Prosecutor/respondent

Fred Forsey

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction and Sentence at Waterford Circuit Criminal Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge misdirected the jury regarding the burden of proof under s. 4 of the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act 2001
  2. 2 Whether s. 4 imposes a legal or evidential burden on the accused
  3. 3 Whether the acts alleged were in relation to the appellant's office or position as a member of Dungarvan UDC

Ratio Decidendi

Section 4 of the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act 2001 imposes a legal burden on the accused to disprove the presumption of corruption on the balance of probabilities. The trial judge's direction to the jury was correct in law. The acts alleged were sufficiently connected to the appellant's office as a member of Dungarvan UDC. The grounds advanced on appeal were not raised at trial and do not warrant overturning the conviction. Even if there was an error, no miscarriage of justice occurred and the proviso would apply.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Conviction and sentence affirmed