Maguire v Governor of Mountjoy Prison (The Dochas Centre), Brennan v Governor of Castlerea Prison, Animashuaun v Governor of Mountjoy Prison, Silaghi v Judge O'Hagan, Marina v Judge O'Hagan

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: O'Donnell J.,McKechnie J.,O'Malley J.
• Judgment Date: 04 December 2017
• Neutral Citation: [2017] IESCDET 130
• Court: Supreme Court
• Date: 04 December 2017

[2017] IESCDET 130

THE SUPREME COURT

DETERMINATION

O'Donnell J.

McKechnie J.

O'Malley J.

IN THE MATTER OF THE CONSTITUTION

BETWEEN

SANDRA MAGUIRE

APPLICANT

AND

THE GOVERNOR OF MOUNTJOY PRISON (THE DOCHAS CENTRE)

RESPONDENT

BETWEEN

THOMAS BRENNAN

APPLICANT

AND

THE GOVERNOR OF CASTLEREA PRISON

RESPONDENT

BETWEEN

MORUFU ADEMOLA ANIMASHAUN

APPLICANT

AND

THE GOVERNOR OF MOUNTJOY PRISON

RESPONDENT

BETWEEN

NAPOLEON SILAGHI

APPLICANT

AND

JUDGE JOHN O'HAGAN

AND

THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

RESPONDENTS

BETWEEN

LUCIAN MARINA

APPLICANT

AND

JUDGE JOHN O”HAGAN

AND

THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

RESPONDENTS

APPLICATIONS FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL TO WHICH ARTICLE 34.5.3° OF THE CONSTITUTION APPLIES.

Result: The Court grants leave to appeal.

Reasons Given:

Jurisdiction

1 These five applications relate to five matters dealt with by the Court of Appeal in a single judgment – see Maguire v. Governor of Mountjoy Prison [2017] IECA 142. The issues raised are, in very brief summary, the obligations of a judge of the Circuit Court dealing with a District Court appeal in a criminal case where the appellant does not appear, and the question whether a valid committal warrant must record consideration by the judge of the option of community service.

2 As is clear from the terms of the Constitution and many determinations made by this Court since the enactment of the 33rd Amendment it is necessary, in order for this Court to grant leave, that it be established that the decision sought to be appealed either involves a matter of general public importance or that it is otherwise in the interest of justice necessary that there be an appeal to this Court.

3 The Court considers it desirable to point out that a determination of the Court on an application for leave, while it is final and conclusive so far as the parties are concerned, is a decision in relation to that application only. The issue is whether the questions raised, and the facts underpinning them, meet the constitutional criteria for leave. It will not, save in the rarest of circumstances, be appropriate to rely on a refusal of leave as having a precedential value in relation to the substantive issues in the context of a different case. Where leave is granted, any issue canvassed in the application will in due course be disposed of in the substantive decision of the Court.

The application for leave

4 The notices filed by the parties are available on this...