Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court refuses judicial review of conviction for driving without an approved insurance policy in the District Court - when eroneous evidence was given of a previous conviction for the same offence - on the grounds that the applicant had displayed a lack of candour, had acquiesced in the previous conviction being raised in evidence at the hearing, and had not pursued a more appropriate avenue of redress by appealing to the Circuit Court.
Criminal law – whether hearing of District Court offence of driving without an approved policy of insurance was in the due course of law – s. 56 of the Road Traffic Act 1961, as amended – sentence imposed on the applicant was based on a fundamental mistake that the applicant having a previous conviction for driving with no insurance - duty of prosecution in relation to investigating previous convictions – 8.14 of the Director of Public Prosecutions’ ‘Guidelines for Prosecutors’ (2007) – s. 18 of the Prevention of Crimes Act 1871 – new grounds raised by the applicant and lack of candour – S.I. 691 of 2011 - Rules of the Superior Court, O. 84 (20)(3) – failure by an applicant to be accurate with all the facts was a key factor – acquiescence – applicant cannot store up a point and then seek to rely on it at a later stage, having failed to raise it in the District Court – failure to avail of alternative remedy – lack of candour would require this court to exercise its discretion to refuse the relief – error could have been corrected on appeal – relief refused.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.