Director of Public Prosecutions v Kirwan [2019] IECA 176 (27 June 2019)

Director of Public Prosecutions v Kirwan [2019] IECA 176 (27 June 2019)

Section 99(8A) of the Criminal Justice Act 2006 (as amended by the 2017 Act) is procedural in nature and applies to all cases where sentencing for the triggering offence occurs after its commencement, regardless of when the offence or conviction occurred. Its application does not constitute retrospective penalisation or breach constitutional or ECHR protections, as the maximum penalty remains unchanged and the sentencing judge retains discretion. The Circuit Court judge was correct in law to remand the defendant to the District Court for consideration of revocation of the suspended sentence under s.99(8A).

Citation
[2019] IECA 176
Parties
Prosecutor: Director of Public Prosecutions; Defendant: William Kirwan
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
27 June 2019
Procedural Posture
Consultative Case Stated (criminal) / Appeal/case Stated From Circuit Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
The Court answered the case stated in the affirmative: the Circuit Court judge was correct in law to apply s.99(8A) and remand the defendant to the District Court.
Legal Topics
Suspended Sentences, Retrospective Legislation, Procedural Law, Sentencing, Interpretation of Statutes
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Suspended Sentences Retrospective Legislation Procedural Law Sentencing Interpretation of Statutes

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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Director of Public Prosecutions

Prosecutor

William Kirwan

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Consultative Case Stated (criminal) / Appeal/case Stated From Circuit Court to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether s.99(8A) of the Criminal Justice Act 2006 (as inserted by s.2 of the Criminal Justice (Suspended Sentences of Imprisonment) Act 2017) applies to offences and convictions occurring before its commencement but where sentencing occurs after commencement
  2. 2 Whether the application of s.99(8A) constitutes retrospective penalisation contrary to constitutional or ECHR principles

Ratio Decidendi

Section 99(8A) of the Criminal Justice Act 2006 (as amended by the 2017 Act) is procedural in nature and applies to all cases where sentencing for the triggering offence occurs after its commencement, regardless of when the offence or conviction occurred. Its application does not constitute retrospective penalisation or breach constitutional or ECHR protections, as the maximum penalty remains unchanged and the sentencing judge retains discretion. The Circuit Court judge was correct in law to remand the defendant to the District Court for consideration of revocation of the suspended sentence under s.99(8A).

Court Disposition

The Court answered the case stated in the affirmative: the Circuit Court judge was correct in law to apply s.99(8A) and remand the defendant to the District Court.

Orders

  • Affirmation of Circuit Court's application of s.99(8A)
  • Remand of defendant to Dublin District Court for consideration of revocation of suspended sentence