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 to restrain criminal proceedings which collapsed after the complainant's partner was seen in conversation with the complainant during a lunch break after being explicitly told by the trial judge not to have any contact, on the grounds that the ruling by the trial judge to allow a further trial was made within jurisdiction, and it was not for the High Court to trespass on the trial judge’s ruling, absent manifest unfairness, which was not evident in this case.
Criminal law – judicial review – application restraining trial – applicant was returned for trial to the Circuit Court sitting at Naas Court house accused of assault causing harm, criminal damage and possession of an article arising from confrontation at his home – trial judge then directed that the complainant’s partner should have no contact with the complainant over the lunch period and that the complainant stay out of the courtroom for the duration of his partner’s cross-examination – applicant’s solicitor observed the complainant’s partner in conversation with the complainant immediately after the court rose for lunch – application for a directed verdict – whether the unfairness to the applicant could not be remedied – attempted collusion between the witnesses – whether there exists a real risk of an unfairness or oppression if the applicant is sent for retrial – reliefs sought 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.
The only e-mail alert service for all Irish judgments over the past 13 years. Click here to request a subscription.
Register Now