Cahill v Judge Reilly

JurisdictionIreland
Judgment Date01 January 1994
Date01 January 1994
Docket Number[1991 No. 281 J.R.]
CourtHigh Court

High Court

[1991 No. 281 J.R.]
Cahill v. Judge Reilly
John Cahill
Applicant
and
District Court Judge Michael Reilly and The Director of Public Prosecutions, Respondent

Case mentioned in this report:—

The State (Healy) v. Donoghue [1976] I.R. 325; (1975) 110 I.L.T.R. 9; (1976) 112 I.L.T.R. 27.

Criminal law - Legal aid - Custodial sentence - Immediate prospect - Conviction or plea of guilty - District Court Judge - Right to legal aid - Duty to advise - Accused - Entitlement - Ignorance - Certiorari - No evidence of ignorance shown - Criminal Justice (Legal Aid) Act, 1962 (No. 12), s. 2.

Constitution - Courts - Legal aid - Custodial sentence - Accused - Legal aid entitlement - Duty to advise accused - When operable - Criminal Justice (Legal Aid) Act, 1962 (No. 12), s. 2 - Constitution of Ireland, 1937, Articles 34, 38 and 40.

Judicial review.

The facts are set out in the judgment of Denham J., post.

On the 19th December, 1991, the applicant obtained leave in the High Court to apply for an order of certiorari by way of judicial review quashing the conviction and sentence imposed on him by the first respondent. Pursuant to originating notice of motion and a statement of grounds of opposition filed, the matter was heard by the High Court (Denham J.) on the 23rd March, 1992.

Section 2 of the Criminal Justice (Legal Aid) Act, 1962, provides that if it appears to the District Court that the means of a person charged before it with an offence are insufficient to enable him to obtain legal aid and that, by reason of the gravity of the charge or of exceptional circumstances, it is essential in the interests of justice that he should have legal aid in the preparation and conduct of his defence, the court shall "on application being made to it in that behalf" grant him a certificate enabling him to obtain free legal aid and to have a solicitor assigned to him for that purpose.

A District Court Judge is obliged to inform an accused of his right to legal aid as soon as it becomes apparent, whether from the gravity of the circumstances of the offence or a plea of guilty or conviction or other evidence, that a custodial sentence is imminent or likely; and such a conviction and sentence may be quashed on review by the High Court for being in violation of the accused's constitutional rights notwithstanding that there is no evidence before the High Court that the accused was unaware of his legal rights by reason of illiteracy, lack of education or otherwise.

So held by Denham J.

The State (Healy) v. Donoghue [1976] I.R. 325 applied.

Cur. adv. vult.

Denham J.

This is an application by way of judicial review for an order of certiorari in respect of an order of the first respondent made on the 13th September, 1991, at Portlaoise District Court in proceedings entitled Garda James Holden, complainant and John Cahill, accused.

The grounds for the said application are:—

  • 1. The first respondent failed to act in accordance with the principles of basic fairness of procedures and of natural and constitutional justice. The applicant was not asked whether he was aware of the charge against him and whether he was pleading guilty or not guilty and was not in a position to defend himself against the charges.

  • 2. The first respondent failed to act in accordance with...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 cases
  • Minister for Justice and Equality v Marjasz
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 24 April 2012
    ...3 IR 732; Minister for Justice v Stapleton [2007] IESC 30, [2008] 1 IR 669; State (Healy) v Donoghue [1976] IR 325; Cahill v Reilly [1994] 3 IR 547; McSorley v Governor of Mountjoy Prison [1996] 2 ILRM 331; Clarke v Kirby [1998] 2 ILRM 30; Leonard v Garavan [2003] 4 IR 60; Nottinghams......
  • Carmody v The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and Others
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 21 January 2005
    ...ECHR 24.5.1991 S v SWITZERLAND APPLICATION NO 12629/87 UNREP ECHR 25.10.1991 BYRNE v JUDGE MCDONNELL 1997 1 IR 392 CAHILL v JUDGE REILLY 1994 3 IR 547 CONROY v AG 1965 IR 411 DPP v B 2002 2 IR 246 K SECURITY LTD & KAVANAGH v IRELAND UNREP GANNON 15.7.77 1977/5/886 KIRWAN v MINISTER FOR JUST......
  • McCann v Monaghan District Judge
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 18 June 2009
    ...2 IR 174 2005/24/4916 2005 IESC 24 STEEL & MORRIS v UNITED KINGDOM 2005 41 EHRR 22 HEALY, STATE v DONOGHUE 1976 IR 325 CAHILL v REILLY 1994 3 IR 547 1992/5/1572 S v LANDY & ORS UNREP LARDNER 10.2.1993 1993/5/1430 KIRWAN v MIN FOR JUSTICE 1994 2 IR 417 1993/12/3851 EMPLOYMENT EQUALITY BIL......
  • Grogan v Parole Board & Min for Justice
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 27 June 2008
    ...for Justice [2001] 4 IR 454, Barry v Sentencing Review Group [2001] 4 IR 167, State (Healy) v Donoghue [1976] IR 325, Cahill v Reilly [1994] 3 IR 547, O'Donoghue v Legal Aid Board (Unrep, Kelly J, 21/12/2004), State (O) v Daly [1977] IR 312, State (O) v O'Brien [1973] IR 50, K Security L......
  • 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