State (Boyle) v Governor of Curragh Military Detention Barracks
| Jurisdiction | Ireland |
| Court | High Court |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1980 |
| Date | 01 January 1980 |
Health - Accommodation - Whether cell lighted and ventilated in accordance with prison regulations - Remedying of defect during course of hearing - Whether order should issue - Whether regulation relating to lighting and ventilation applied only to punishment cells used for separate and close confinement of prisoners - Meaning of separate and close confinement - Whether formal rules for military custody correspond to rules for civilian custody - Whether administration of rules by soldiers affects legality of detention - Requirements of prison order and discipline - Prisons Act 1972 (No. 7), s. 2 (9) - Prisons Act, 1972 (Military Custody) Regulations 1972 (S.I. No.138), Regs. 6, 7, 66, 68. Prisoner - Transfer by Minister of prisoner from civilian to military custody - Whether prisoner entitled to reasons for transfer - Whether Minister exercising administrative discretion - Whether statutory power had lapsed - Whether prisoner in lawful custody at time of transfer - Prisons Act, 1972 (No. 7), s. 2 (3), 2 (4) - Prisons Act, 1974, (No. 10), s.1.
The prosecutor was convicted of a criminal offence and sentenced to penal servitude for eight years. At the time of his trial he was on remand in the Curragh Military Detention Barracks and, in accordance with the provisions of the Prisons Act, 1972, the prosecutor was returned there to serve his sentence. He applied to the High Court for relief under Article 40.4 of the Constitution complaining that the cell in which he was detained was not furnished with a means of communicating with an officer of the prison, which he alleged was in violation of Reg. 6 of the Prisons Act, 1972, (Military Custody) Regulations 1972. Reg. 6 provided that a cell may not be used for the 'separate confinement' of a prisoner unless certified by the Minister for Justice to be, inter alia, of such a size and to be lighted in a manner to enable a prisoner to communicate at any time with an officer of the prison. In evidence it was stated that the Detention Barracks had a bell system which was wrecked and no longer operative. During the course of the hearing, the respondent argued that Reg. 6 applied only to punishment cells and not to the prosecutor who was undergoing ordinary cellular confinement. Towards the end of the hearing the respondent produced a certificate regarding the make-up of the cells in the Detention Barracks. The prosecutor also submitted that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McM v The Manager of Trinity House
...ACT 1957 S5 J V DELAP 1989 IR 167 CRAVEN, STATE V FRAWLEY 1980 IR 1 BOYLE, STATE V GOV OF THE CURRAGH MILITARY DETENTION BARRACKS 1980 ILRM 242 PRISONS ACT 1972 S2(3) CONSTITUTION ART 42.5 MURPHY V DUBLIN CORPORATION 1972 IR 215 CARLTONA LTD V COMMISSIONERS OF WORKS 1943 2 AER 560 REIDY......
-
P McD v The Governor of the X Prison
...is warranted because thereby a detention is rendered unlawful; The State (Boyle) v Governor of the Curragh Military Detention Barracks [1980] ILRM 242, 13 More fundamentally, however, where a prisoner deliberately embarks on a slow degradation of his or her own health, this is a voluntary a......
-
Burns v Bank of Ireland
...Garda Síochána - Time limit on direction - Whether direction could be open ended - State (Boyle) v Governor of Curragh Military Barracks [1980] ILRM 242, O'Callaghan v Ireland [1994] 1 IR 555, Brennan v Minister for Justice [1995] 1 IR 612 and Murphy v GM [2001] 4 IR 113 followed - Crimi......
-
Devoy v Governor of Portlaoise Prison and Others
...ILRM 465 RICHARDSON, STATE v GOVERNOR OF MOUNTJOY PRISON 1980 ILRM 82 BOYLE, STATE v GOVERNOR OF CURRAGH MILITARY DETENTION BARRACKS 1980 ILRM 242 HOLLAND v GOVERNOR OF PORTLAOISE PRISON 2004 2 IR 573 MURRAY v IRELAND 1985 IR 532 1985 ILRM 542 DPP v SHAW 1982 IR 1 DPP v DELANEY 1997 3 ......