D.P.P. v. O Mahony [2002] IEHC 50 (25 April 2002)

D.P.P. v. O Mahony [2002] IEHC 50 (25 April 2002)

The High Court held that the application for and issue of the summons constituted 'business transacted' and that the proceedings were validly continued in the new district in accordance with the statutory instrument, thus the District Judge had jurisdiction and the date and venue for the hearing were valid.

Citation
[2002] IEHC 50
Parties
Prosecutor/respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions; Accused/applicant: Kevin O Mahony
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
25 April 2002
Procedural Posture
Case Stated / High Court Review of District Court Decision
Outcome
question in case stated answered in the affirmative; District Judge's decision affirmed
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction, Summons Validity, District Court Procedure
Criminal Law Procedural Law Jurisdiction Summons Validity District Court Procedure

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 1 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Director of Public Prosecutions

Prosecutor/respondent

Kevin O Mahony

Accused/applicant

Procedural Posture

Case Stated / High Court Review of District Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the District Court had jurisdiction to hear the case given the change in district boundaries and the venue specified in the summons
  2. 2 Whether the date and venue for the hearing of the summons were valid

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court held that the application for and issue of the summons constituted 'business transacted' and that the proceedings were validly continued in the new district in accordance with the statutory instrument, thus the District Judge had jurisdiction and the date and venue for the hearing were valid.

Court Disposition

question in case stated answered in the affirmative; District Judge's decision affirmed