Attorney General v Hollingsworth
| Jurisdiction | Ireland |
| Court | Supreme Court |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1973 |
| Date | 01 January 1973 |
(S.C.)
The Attorney General
and
Hollingsworth
Blood sample - Whether specimen tube stopped in accordance with regulations - Road Traffic Act, 1968 (Part V) Regulations, 1969 (S.I. No. 196), Art. 8 (3) (d) - Road Traffic Act, 1961 (No. 24), s. 49.
Regulations made pursuant to the Act of 1961 provided for the procedure to be adopted when taking a sample of a driver's blood preparatory to testing the sample for its alcoholic content. Article 8 of the regulations provided that a medical practitioner...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
3 cases
-
DPP v Croom-Carroll
...Defendant/Respondent Citations: ROAD TRAFFIC ACT 1994 S18(1) ROAD TRAFFIC ACT 1961 S49(2) ROAD TRAFFIC ACT 1994 S10 AG V HOLLINGSWORTH 1973 107 ILTR 77 DPP V MCGOVERN UNREP GEOGHEGAN 28.10.1998 1998/16/5810 ROAD TRAFFIC ACT 1968 ROAD TRAFFIC REGS 1968 SI 196/1969 ROAD TRAFFIC ACT 1994 S19 ......
-
DPP v Kemmy
...of Public Prosecutions Complainant and Michael Kemmy Defendant Cases mentioned in this report:— 1 Attorney General v. Hollingsworth (1973) 107 I.L.T.R. 77. 2 Bennett v. Brumfitt (1867) L.R. 3 C.P. 28. 3 State (Bruce) v. Shannon (1948) 82 I.L.T. & S.J. 180. 4 State (Attorney General) v. Roe ......
-
DPP v CROOM-CARROLL(Case stated and Order only)
...Defendant's blood sample had been placed was not in fact sealed. Mr. Reilly opened to me the case of Attorney General -v- Hollingsworth (1973) 107 ILTR 77 where the Supreme Court held that the regulations then in force were not complied with where a blood sample had been sent to the Medical......