Friel v District Justice McMenamin
| Jurisdiction | Ireland |
| Judge | Mr. Justice Barron |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1990 |
| Neutral Citation | 1989 WJSC-HC 1507 |
| Docket Number | No 367 J.R./1988,[1988 No. 367 JR] |
| Court | High Court |
| Date | 01 January 1990 |
1989 WJSC-HC 1507
THE HIGH COURT
Citations:
FISHERIES (CONSOLIDATION) ACT 1959 S182(2)
FISHERIES (CONSOLIDATION) ACT 1959 S182(4)
FISHERIES (CONSOLIDATION) ACT 1959 S308
FISHERIES (CONSOLIDATION) ACT 1959 PART XVIII
PETTY SESSIONS (IRL) ACT 1851 S20
DCR 1948 O.64 r5
DCR O.85
DISTRICT COURT (COURTS ACT 1971) RULES 1972 RULE 4
COURTS ACT 1971 S14
FISHERIES (CONSOLIDATION) ACT 1959 S293(2)(a)
Synopsis:
CRIMINAL LAW
Trial
Evidence - Judge's note - Copy - Refusal - Defendant's rights - Refusal of District Justice to furnish convicted person with copy of note - No right to receive copy note - Conviction valid - (1988/367 JR - Barron J. - 13/11/89) - [1990] 2 I.R. 210 |Friel v. McMenamin| DISTRICT COURT District Justice Evidence - Note - Copy - Defendant's rights - Refusal to furnish convicted person with copy of note - No right to obtain copy note - Conviction valid - (1988/367 JR - Barron J. - 13/11/89)
|Friel v. McMenamin|
EVIDENCE
Note
Copy - Request - District Justice - Refusal - Defendant's rights - Refusal to furnish convicted person with copy of note - No right to obtain copy note - Conviction valid - (1988/367 JR - Barron J. - 13/11/89) - [1990] ILRM 761 - [1990] 2 I.R. 210
|Friel v. McMenamin|
FISHERIES
Offence
Conviction - Validity - Evidence - Witness to offence - Jurisdiction - Offence committed in area of one regional board - Witness an officer of another regional board - District Justice's note of evidence - Refusal to furnish convicted person with copy of note - Conviction valid being based on testimony of competent witness - District Court Rules, 1948, rr. 64, 85 - District Court (Courts Act, 1871) Rules, 1972, r. 4 - Petty Sessions (Ireland) Act, 1851, s. 20 - Fisheries (Consolidation) Act, 1959, ss. 92, 293, 301 - (1988/367 JR - Barron J. - 13/11/89) - [1990] 2 I.R. 210
|Friel v. McMenamin|
Judgment of Mr. Justice Barrondelivered the 13TH day of November1989.
The Applicant was convicted on the 16th June 1988 at the District Court Letterkenny of two offences namely: that on the 27th June 1987 at sea in the northern fisheries region he did have in his possession or control 147 salmon unlawfully captured contrary to the forms of Section 182(2) and (4) of the Fisheries (Consolidation) Act 1959as amended; and that on the 27th June 1987 at sea in the northern fisheries region he did assault a person to wit Edward Haley exercising powers confe0rred on him by Part XVIII of the Fisheries (Consolidation) Act 1959by stabbing him with a knife contrary to the form of Section 308 of the said Act as amended.
He now seeks to have these convictions quashed. He raises two main grounds. The first relates to the refusal by the Respondent to furnish to the Applicant the note of the evidence taken by the Respondent at the Applicant's trial. The second relates to the authority of an officer of a regional board to act outside the area of that board.
It is accepted that the Respondent kept a note of the evidence as he is required to do both by virtue of the provisions of Section 20 of the Petty Sessions (Ireland) Act1851 and Rule 64(5) of the District Court Rules 1948. The Applicant however submits that he was entitled to be furnished with a copy of these notes pursuant to the provisions of rule 85 of the District Court Rules 1948 notwithstanding its amendment by Rule 4 of the District Court (Courts Act 1971) Rules 1972. The Respondent relies upon this amendment and also submits that the District Court is now a Court of record and that the proper construction of Section 14 of the Courts Act 1971does not permit the note of the evidence to be used to question the sufficiency of the decision as evidenced by the formal order of theCourt.
There is no statutory requirement that a note of the evidence, even when it is required to be kept, should be furnished to a Defendant....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hegarty v District Justice Fitzpatrick
...DCR r85 DISTRICT COURT RULES 1955 SI 83/1955 RULE 9 DISTRICT COURT RULES 1955 SI 83/1955 RULE 10 COURTS ACT 1971 S14 FRIEL V MCMENAMIN 1990 2 IR 210 Synopsis: CRIMINAL LAW Trial Evidence - Judge's note - Copy - Refusal - Defendant without right to obtain copy - Summary offence - Trial and ......
-
DPP v Ní Chondúin
...ACT 1971 S14 CRIMINAL JUSTICE (MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) ACT 1997 S20(b) DELANY COURTS ACTS 1974 - 1997 2ED 2000 338 FRIEL v MCMENAMIN 1990 ILRM 761 R (WILBORD) v ARMAGH JUSTICES 1918 2 IR 347 PETTY SESSIONS (IRELAND) ACT 1851 S21 DPP v V NOLAN 1990 2 IR 526 SHANNON & SHANNON v DISTRICT J......
-
DPP v Martin & Kelly
...COURTS ACT 1971 S14 CRIMINAL JUSTICE (MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) ACT 1997 S20(b) DELANEY COURTS ACTS 1974–1997 2ED 338 FRIEL V MCMENAMIN 1990 ILRM 761 Synopsis Criminal Law Judicial review; prohibition; summons not signed by District Court Clerk; first named respondent had dismissed charge;......
-
McCaffrey v Gilvarry
...ACT 1851 S20 DCR r64(5) DCR r65 DPP V GILL 1980 IR 263 MIN AGRICULTURE V NORGRO 1980 IR 155 DPP V CLEIN 1983 ILRM 76 FRIEL V MCMENAMIN 1990 2 IR 210 1 Judgment of Mr. Justice Barrondelivered the 8th day of March 1990 2The Applicant appeared at the District Court in Sligo on the 30th Septemb......