State (DPP) v Independent Newspapers Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: O'Hanlon J.,
• Judgment Date: 01 January 1985
• Neutral Citation: 1983 WJSC-HC 1944
• Court: High Court
• Date: 01 January 1985

1983 WJSC-HC 1944

THE HIGH COURT

No. 262 S.S./1984

State (D.P.P.) v. INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPERS

STATE SIDE

THE STATE AT THE PROSECUTION OF THE DIRECTOR OP PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

.v.

INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPERS LIMITED NIALL HANLT AND CHARLES MALLON

1 Judgment of O'Hanlon J., delivered the 28th day of May 1984.

2 In this case the Director of Public Prosecutions seeks a Conditional Order of Attachment against Charles Mallon, a journalist, Niall Hanly, editor of the "Evening Herald", and Independent Newspapers Limited, as publishers of the "Evening Herald", in respect of material published in the issue of the "Evening Herald" which appeared on the 30th March, 1984, and which stated that the Director of Public Prosecutions intended to bring indecency charges against a local authority councillor. The political party to which the councillor belonged was referred to, but the name of the person involved was not given, nor was the particular local authority to thich he belonged identified in the report.

3 At the time the report was published, no charge had yet been brought, but the affidavit of Louis J. Dockery, Chief state Solicitor, grounding the present application, links the publication with a charge brought against a named accused on the 1st April, 1984. Had the publication complained of appeared after a preliminary examination had commenced under the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Act, 1967, it would have amounted to a breach of Section 17 of that Act, giving rise to the penal proceedings contemplated by that Section, which, for the first time, imposed very stringent restrictions on the information which could be given in the Press concerning the proceedings in the District Court leading on to a possible indictment.

4 In the present application no reliance is placed on those innovative provisions found in Section 17 of the Act of 1967, but rather on the general rules of law concerning the publication of material which may tend to prejudice the trial of proceedings which are pending.

5 It appears to, me that the present application should not be granted, for a number of reasons. In the first place, it is very unusual for such an application to be brought in respect of material published before anyone has been charged in respect of a particular offence, and there appear to be only obiter dicta supporting the right to seek attachment for contempt in such circumstances. In R. .v. Parke, (1903) 2 KB 432...