Patterson v DPP and Others

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: O'Neill J.
• Judgment Date: 25 November 2009
• Neutral Citation: [2009] IEHC 520
• Docket Number: [No. 890 J.R. 2008]
• Court: High Court
• Date: 25 November 2009

[2009] IEHC 520

THE HIGH COURT

[No. 890 J.R. 2008]

Patterson v DPP & Ors

[2009] IEHC 520

JUDICIAL REVIEW

BETWEEN

JOHN PATTERSON

APPLICANT

AND

THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS, GARDA DEIRDRE BARRY, JUDGE DAVID MCHUGH, THE PRESIDENT OF THE CIRCUIT COURT AND SUCH JUDGES AS HE DESIGNATES FOR THE TRIAL OF CRIMINAL BUSINESS

RESPONDENTS

DCR O.24 r32

DCR O.12 r3

SINGER, IN RE (NO 2) 1964 98 ILTR 112

HUGHES, STATE v NEYLON & SHEEHY 1982 ILRM 108 1982/6/1081

AG v JUDGE SHEEHY 1990 1 IR 434 1989/4/792

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT 1967 S4A

CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1999 S9

DPP, PEOPLE v MCCORMACK & DUNNE 1984 IR 177 1984/6/1961

CRIMINAL LAW

Trial

Return for trial - Accused returned for trial in Dublin Circuit Criminal Court to present sitting of court - Whether fact that applicant not brought before Circuit Court within sittings of Circuit Court vitiated or effected validity of notice for trial - Whether return for trial lapsed or expired - Statutory basis of return for trial - Whether any statutory foundation for requirement that return be to specific sitting in terms of time of trial court - Transmission of documents to court of trial - District Court extended time for transmission from District Court to Circuit Court - Whether District Court functus officio - Whether District Court had jurisdiction to entertain proposed application - Re Singer (2) [1988] IRLM 112, (1964) 98 ILTR 112; State (Hughes) v Neilan [1982] ILRM 108 and Attorney General v Sheehy [1991] IR 434 considered - People (DPP) v McCormack [1984] IR 177 followed - District Court Rules 1997 (SI 93/1997), O 24, r 32; O 12, r 3 - Criminal Procedure Act 1967 (No 12), s 4(A) - Criminal Justice Act 1999 (No 10), s 9 - Relief refused (2008/890JR - O'Neill J - 25/11/2009) [2009] IEHC 520

Patterson v DPP

EXTEMPORE JUDGMENT of

O'Neill J.

delivered on the 25th day of November, 2009

1 In this case, the applicant seeks orders by way of judicial review, in the first place, an order ofcertiorari quashing an order of the District Court which was made on 30^th June, 2008, whereby the District Court extended the time for the transmission from the District Court to the Circuit Court of documents required to be transmitted by O. 24, r. 32 of the Rules of the District Court, and secondly, the applicant seeks an order of prohibition of his trial.

2 The applicant was charged with a number of offences of sexual assault. In due course, he was returned by the District Court on 7^th February, 2008, for trial in the Dublin Circuit Criminal Court. That return for trial prescribed that the applicant be returned to the "present" sitting of that court.

3 Nothing happened for a number of months, and then towards June 2008, it was intimated to the applicant that an application would be made by the respondents to the District Court sitting in Tallaght, under O. 12, r.3 of the Rules of the District Court. The applicant, on the advice of his solicitor, took the view that he, having already been returned for trial, that the District Court wasfunctus officio and therefore had no jurisdiction to entertain the proposed application, and on that basis, declined to attend the court, needless to say, having intimated that, if required, would do so as a matter of courtesy.

4 In any event, on 30^th June, 2008, the respondents did apply to the District Court and did succeed in getting from the District Court an order extending the time, as I have already indicated. In due course, thereafter, the matter came before the Circuit Court, but then these judicial review proceedings were taken.

5 The case which is made by the applicant is...