Kennedy -v- Director of Public Prosecutions & anor [2014] IEHC 200 (28 March 2014)

Kennedy -v- Director of Public Prosecutions & anor [2014] IEHC 200 (28 March 2014)

The applicant failed to demonstrate that the redacted portions of the document were relevant to an issue in the trial such that non-disclosure created a real risk of an unfair trial. The legal analysis or commentary in the redacted sections was irrelevant to the lawfulness of the Garda's actions, which was a matter for the trial court. Thus, the reliefs sought were refused.

Citation
[2014] IEHC 200
Parties
Applicant: Giles Kennedy; First Respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions; Second Respondent: Her Honour Judge Margaret Heneghan
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
28 March 2014
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Judgment on Application for Judicial Review Reliefs
Outcome
Reliefs refused
Legal Topics
Disclosure, Legal Professional Privilege, Road Traffic Offences, Judicial Review
Criminal Law Administrative Law Disclosure Legal Professional Privilege Road Traffic Offences Judicial Review

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Giles Kennedy

Applicant

Director of Public Prosecutions

First Respondent

Her Honour Judge Margaret Heneghan

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment on Application for Judicial Review Reliefs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether refusal to disclose the full Garda circular deprived the applicant of a fair trial
  2. 2 Whether the document attracted legal professional privilege
  3. 3 Whether the applicant was entitled to the unredacted document

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to demonstrate that the redacted portions of the document were relevant to an issue in the trial such that non-disclosure created a real risk of an unfair trial. The legal analysis or commentary in the redacted sections was irrelevant to the lawfulness of the Garda's actions, which was a matter for the trial court. Thus, the reliefs sought were refused.

Court Disposition

Reliefs refused

Orders

  • Application for judicial review reliefs refused