Coonan -v- Judge Coughlan & Anor [2009] IEHC 582 (01 December 2009)

Coonan -v- Judge Coughlan & Anor [2009] IEHC 582 (01 December 2009)

The applicant is not entitled to an order of mandamus because she failed to follow the statutory sequence for case stated procedure, specifically by applying for a recognisance before requesting the District Court judge to state a case. The statutory process is not discretionary and must be observed in order.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2009] IEHC 582
Parties
Applicant: Gillian Coonan; Respondent: Judge John Coughlan; Respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
01 December 2009
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
application refused
Legal Topics
Recognisance, Case Stated Procedure, Judicial Review, Road Traffic Act
Criminal Law Administrative Law Recognisance Case Stated Procedure Judicial Review Road Traffic Act

Source-derived case record

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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gillian Coonan

Applicant

Judge John Coughlan

Respondent

Director of Public Prosecutions

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the District Court judge is obliged to fix a recognisance for an appeal by way of case stated before a request for a case stated is made
  2. 2 Whether the applicant followed the statutory sequence required for case stated procedure

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant is not entitled to an order of mandamus because she failed to follow the statutory sequence for case stated procedure, specifically by applying for a recognisance before requesting the District Court judge to state a case. The statutory process is not discretionary and must be observed in order.

Court Disposition

application refused