Corry & Ors, R. v [2006] NICC 7 (24 March 2006)

Corry & Ors, R. v [2006] NICC 7 (24 March 2006)

The court has no power to issue a witness summons upon the application of one defendant directed to another defendant jointly charged in the same indictment, as this would circumvent the rule that an accused cannot be compelled to give evidence or produce documents. Compelling such disclosure would also infringe the privilege against self-incrimination.

Citation
[2006] NICC 7
Parties
Prosecution: The Queen; Defendant: William Corry; Defendant: Leslie Wright; Defendant/applicant: Safeways (Ireland) Limited; Defendant/respondent: Gilbert Ash (NI) Limited; Defendant: Brickkiln Civil Engineering Contractors Limited
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
24 March 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Application for Third Party Disclosure by Co Defendant
Outcome
application refused
Legal Topics
Third Party Disclosure, Compellability of Co Defendants, Privilege Against Self Incrimination
Criminal Law Evidence Third Party Disclosure Compellability of Co Defendants Privilege Against Self Incrimination

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Queen

Prosecution

William Corry

Defendant

Leslie Wright

Defendant

Safeways (Ireland) Limited

Defendant/applicant

Gilbert Ash (NI) Limited

Defendant/respondent

Brickkiln Civil Engineering Contractors Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Application for Third Party Disclosure by Co Defendant

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court has power to order a co-defendant to make disclosure to another defendant under third party disclosure provisions
  2. 2 Whether compelling a co-defendant to produce documents infringes the privilege against self-incrimination

Ratio Decidendi

The court has no power to issue a witness summons upon the application of one defendant directed to another defendant jointly charged in the same indictment, as this would circumvent the rule that an accused cannot be compelled to give evidence or produce documents. Compelling such disclosure would also infringe the privilege against self-incrimination.

Court Disposition

application refused