Director of Public Prosecutions -v- Lynch [2016] IEHC 723 (21 November 2016)

Director of Public Prosecutions -v- Lynch [2016] IEHC 723 (21 November 2016)

The delay in commencing the pre-test observation period, caused by awaiting a trained Garda, did not amount to unlawful detention as it was not the result of a rigid, fixed policy requiring objective justification, but rather fell within Garda discretion and was reasonable in the circumstances.

Citation
[2016] IEHC 723
Parties
Prosecutor: Director of Public Prosecutions; Accused: Gerard Lynch
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
21 November 2016
Procedural Posture
Case Stated (consultative) From District Court / High Court Judgment on Consultative Case Stated
Outcome
Appeal allowed; questions answered in favour of the prosecution
Legal Topics
Lawfulness of Detention, Breath Alcohol Testing, Pre Test Observation Period, Procedural Fairness
Criminal Law Road Traffic Law Lawfulness of Detention Breath Alcohol Testing Pre Test Observation Period Procedural Fairness

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 2 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Director of Public Prosecutions

Prosecutor

Gerard Lynch

Accused

Procedural Posture

Case Stated (consultative) From District Court / High Court Judgment on Consultative Case Stated

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused was unlawfully detained due to delay in commencing pre-test observation period for breath alcohol testing
  2. 2 Whether Garda procedure requiring a trained officer to conduct both observation and test justifies delay

Ratio Decidendi

The delay in commencing the pre-test observation period, caused by awaiting a trained Garda, did not amount to unlawful detention as it was not the result of a rigid, fixed policy requiring objective justification, but rather fell within Garda discretion and was reasonable in the circumstances.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; questions answered in favour of the prosecution

Orders

  • The accused was not unlawfully detained; evidence not inadmissible on this ground
  • District Judge's view that the charge should be dismissed was incorrect