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, in judicial review proceedings, grants a declaration that the offence of “offending” modesty is inconsistent with the Constitution, on the grounds that it is hopelessly vague, subjective in character and intrinsically invites arbitrary and inconsistent application.
Criminal law – judicial review - whether the remaining portion of s. 18 of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act 1935, as amended by s. 18 of the Criminal Law (Rape)(Amendment) Act 1990, is unconstitutional and did not survive the enactment of the Constitution – constitutionality of the “offending modesty” provision – whether the applicants have the requisite locus standi to challenge the constitutionality of s. 18 of the 1935 Act in the light of Douglas – whether s. 18 of the 1935 Act enjoys a presumption of constitutionality – legal certainty and the operation of the criminal law – Article 5 and Article 15.2.1 – constitutional vagueness – no true analogy between s. 18 of the 1935 Act and other sexual offences – provisions of s. 18 are manifestly unconstitutional.
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