State (Dowling) v Kingston

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 01 January 1939
• Date: 01 January 1939
• Court: Supreme Court

(S.C.),

State (Dowling)

and

Kingston

Article 6 of the Constitution (1922) - Sovereignty of State - Jurisdiction - Person resident in Irish Free State -Charge of neglecting to maintain wife and child in Scotland - Scottish warrant to apprehend sent to Irish Free State - Warrant endorsed by District Justice - Arrest of accused thereunder - Validity of endorsement of warrant - Petty Sessions (Ir.) Act, 1851 (14 15 Vic., c. 93) - Whether s. 29 in force in Irish Free State - Courts of Justice Act, 1924 (No. 10 of 1924), s. 78 - Meaning of jurisdiction therein - Habeas Corpus Act (Ir.), 1781 (21 22Geo. III, c. 11), s. 5 - Second writ - Ground of detention of prisoner - Dissenting judgment in favour of person in custody - Whether sufficient to entitle prisoner to be released - Right to applyseriatim to every Judge

T.H.D., who was a citizen of the Irish Free State residing in Dublin, was arrested in Dublin on a warrant issued in Glasgow by the Sheriff Substitute, which charged him with neglecting to maintain his wife and child in Glasgow, the warrant being backed for execution in the Dublin Metropolitan Area by an Assistant Commissioner of the Garda Siochana under the provisions of s. 29 of the Petty Sessions (Ir.) Act, 1851. Having been released on habeas corpus, T.H.D. was again arrested in Dublin on a warrant issued in Glasgow by the Sheriff Substitute for neglecting to maintain his wife and child in Glasgow. The latter warrant differed from the former in the dates of the alleged offences, in that it alleged that T.H.D. was able to maintain his wife and child and in that it was backed for execution in the Dublin Metropolitan Area by one of the Justices of the District Court assigned to that area. T.H.D. obtained a conditional order of habeas corpus and on the hearing of a motion to make absolute the conditional order...