Bord na gCon v Murphy

Judgment Date01 January 1971
Date01 January 1971
Docket Number[S.C. No. 3 1970]
CourtSupreme Court
Bord na gCon

Hearsay - Statement in writing on subject of offences charged - Statement written and signed by defendant's solicitor apparently on behalf of defendant - Whether statement contained an admission - Proof that defendant made the statement.

The complainants were a statutory body having power to bring prosecutions for contraventions of certain provisions of the Greyhound Industry Act, 1958, and the regulations made thereunder. The complainants wrote to the defendant and accused him of contravening the provisions of the Act and requested him to furnish any observations that he wished to make. Subsequently the defendant was charged and convicted in the District Court of several offences under the Act of 1958. At the hearing of an appeal by the defendant to the Circuit Court, the complainants sought to produce as evidencecertain correspondence and a statement relating to the offences charged. The correspondence and the statement had been written by the defendant's solicitor in reply to the complainants, initial letter and on behalf of the defendant. As the complainants did not offer sworn testimony to establish that the documents had been written with the defendant's authority and in accordance with his...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Walsh v Sligo County Council
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 20 December 2010
    ...[1946] 2 All E.R. 252. Barraclough v. Johnson (1838) 8 Ad. & E. 99; 112 E.R. 773; [1835-42] All E.R. Rep. 606. Bord na gCon v. Murphy [1970] I.R. 301; (1970) 105 I.L.T.R. 77. Bruen v. Murphy (Unreported, High Court, McWilliams J., 11th March, 1980). Capital Trust Co. v. Fowler (1921) 64 D.L......
  • Edward Walsh and Another v County Council for County of Sligo
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 11 November 2013
    ...[1938] 2 All ER 237; Director of Public Prosecutions v Jones [1999] 2 AC 240; In re Ward of Court [1996] 2 IR 79; Bord na gCon v Murphy [1970] IR 301; The King v Lambe (1791) 2 Leach 552; Morrissey v Boyle [1942] IR 514; Woolway v Rowe (1834) 1 Ad & El 114; M'Kenna v Earl of Howth (1893) 2......
  • Smurfit Paribas Bank Ltd v A.A.B. Export Finance Ltd
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 15 February 1990
    ...C.L.R. 52. Balabel v. Air India [1988] Ch. 317; [1988] 2 W.L.R. 1036; [1988] 2 All E.R. 246; (1988) 132 S.J. 699. Bord na gCon v. Murphy [1970] I.R. 301; (1970) 105 I.L.T.R. 77. Cook v. Carroll [1945] I.R. 515; (1945) 79 I.L.T.R. 116. Dubai Bank Ltd. v. Galadari [1990] Ch. 981; [1989] 3 All......
  • Walsh & Cassidy v Sligo County Council
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 20 December 2010
    ...An admission is a statement made by a party which is adverse to his or her case. As stated by Ó Dálaigh C.J. in Bord na gCon v. Murphy [1970] I.R. 301, 310, although in the context of criminal proceedings and ultimately finding that the statements in question were not in fact admissions:- "......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT