Clifford -v- Director of Public Prosecutions [2013] IESC 43 (25 October 2013)

Clifford -v- Director of Public Prosecutions [2013] IESC 43 (25 October 2013)

It was open to the District Judge to infer recklessness as to provoking a breach of the peace under s.6 of the 1994 Act even where no breach was likely, provided from the accused's perspective there was a substantial risk and he proceeded regardless. For the failure to appear charge, the existence of a court order admitting the accused to bail on recognisance is required to prove the offence; if such order is not available, there is insufficient evidence to convict.

Citation
[2013] IESC 43
Parties
Appellant/accused: Paul Clifford; Respondent/prosecutor: Director of Public Prosecutions (at the suit of Garda Susan McLoughlin)
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
25 October 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (case Stated) / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court on Case Stated
Outcome
Questions on public order charge answered in favour of prosecution; conditional answer on failure to appear charge depending on availability of court order admitting to bail.
Legal Topics
Public Order Offences, Failure to Appear on Bail, Case Stated Procedure, Evidentiary Requirements, Recklessness in Criminal Law
Criminal Law Public Order Offences Failure to Appear on Bail Case Stated Procedure Evidentiary Requirements Recklessness in Criminal Law

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Paul Clifford

Appellant/accused

Director of Public Prosecutions (at the suit of Garda Susan McLoughlin)

Respondent/prosecutor

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (case Stated) / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court on Case Stated

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a District Judge can infer intent or recklessness to provoke a breach of the peace under s.6 of the Criminal Justice (Public Order) Act 1994 where no breach was likely to occur; Whether the prosecution must prove by evidence that the accused was admitted to bail on recognisance for a charge under s.13 of the Criminal Justice Act 1984 (failure to appear)

Ratio Decidendi

It was open to the District Judge to infer recklessness as to provoking a breach of the peace under s.6 of the 1994 Act even where no breach was likely, provided from the accused's perspective there was a substantial risk and he proceeded regardless. For the failure to appear charge, the existence of a court order admitting the accused to bail on recognisance is required to prove the offence; if such order is not available, there is insufficient evidence to convict.

Court Disposition

Questions on public order charge answered in favour of prosecution; conditional answer on failure to appear charge depending on availability of court order admitting to bail.

Orders

  • Question (a) on public order charge answered yes; question (b) answered that District Judge may infer recklessness even if no breach likely, if substantial risk perceived by accused.
  • On failure to appear charge, District Judge may convict only if court order admitting to bail on recognisance was available; otherwise, insufficient evidence.