Geaney v. D.P.P. [1999] IEHC 53; [2000] 1 IR 412 (8th December, 1999)

There is no legal obligation on the prosecution in summary proceedings to procure the attendance or tender for examination all witnesses, provided the defence is given all relevant information and a reasonable opportunity to secure the witness's attendance; thus, the prosecution may proceed in the absence of the witness if these conditions are met.

Citation: [2000] 1 IR 412
Parties: Applicant: John Geaney; First Respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions; Second Respondent: Judge John Connellan
Jurisdiction: Ireland
Procedural Posture: Judicial Review / Judgment on Application for Order Prohibiting Prosecution Without Attendance of Witness
Outcome: Reliefs refused
Legal Topics: Prosecution's Duty to Call Witnesses, Right to Fair Trial, Disclosure Obligations, Summary Proceedings

Criminal Law Constitutional Law Procedural Law Prosecution's Duty to Call Witnesses Right to Fair Trial Disclosure Obligations Summary Proceedings

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 8 Party arguments 2

Parties

John Geaney

Applicant

Director of Public Prosecutions

First Respondent

Judge John Connellan

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Judgment on Application for Order Prohibiting Prosecution Without Attendance of Witness

Legal Issues

1 Whether the prosecution is obliged to procure the attendance or tender for examination a witness whose evidence may assist the defence in summary proceedings
2 Whether failure to secure the attendance of a witness violates the applicant's right to fair procedures and a fair trial

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Reliefs refused

Orders

Application for order prohibiting prosecution without attendance of Michael Houlihan refused