State (Hayden) v Good

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 01 January 1972
• Date: 01 January 1972
• Docket Number: [1969. Nos. 205, 318 SS.]
• Court: Supreme Court

Supreme Court

[1969. Nos. 205, 318 SS.]

The State (Hayden) v. Good

THE STATE (at the Prosecution of PATRICK HAYDEN)

and

DISTRICT JUSTICE HERMAN GOOD

District Court - Order - Mistake - Criminal charge dismissed inadvertently - Complaint not heard - Essential requirement of justice disregarded - Order quashed on certiorari - Invalidation of proceedings subsequent to and dependent upon mistaken order.

Certiorari.

The prosecutor, Patrick Hayden, was the defendant in certain criminal proceedings entitled The People (Attorney General) v. Hayden. The charges in these criminal proceedings were recorded on charge sheet No. 212 of 1969 (Harcourt Terrace Garda Station) and were (a) breaking and entering a lock-up shop at No. 24 Aungier Street and committing a felony therein contrary to s. 26, sub-s. 1, of the Larceny Act, 1916; (b) larceny and (c) receiving stolen property contrary to s. 33, sub-s. 1, of the Act of 1916.

The proceedings in relation to charge sheet 212 were discharged inadvertently by an order made by District Justice John Farrell on the 5th June, 1969. When the mistake was discovered the prosecution stated that no evidence would be adduced and requested the District Justice to mark the charges as "withdrawn", which the District Justice did on the 17th June. The same charges were then brought on a new charge sheet, No. 212A, and the examination of the charges on the new charge sheet came before District Justice Herman Good who made an order on the 1st August adjourning that matter to the 2nd October and remanding the prosecutor (Hayden) on bail to that date.

On the 10th September the prosecutor obtained from the High Court (Murnaghan J.) a conditional order of certiorari addressed to District Justice Herman Good and directing that "the order of the said District Justice dated the 1st day of August, 1969, in relation to the said charges and all records and entries in relation thereto" be sent forward to be quashed unless cause to the contrary was shown. District Justice Herman Good showed cause by filing an affidavit in the following terms:—

"1. I say that on the 1st August, 1969, the prosecutor appeared before me at the District Court, Chancery Street. Dublin, charged as appears on charge sheet 212A. I refer to the said charge sheet when produced.

2. The prosecutor asked for the attendance of witnesses to make sworn depositions and, accordingly, I remanded the prosecutor on continuing bail to the 2nd October, 1969, at Court No. 6, at 10.30 a.m. for that purpose. I refer to my order endorsed on the said charge sheet.

3. I show cause against the conditional order made by the High Court on the 10th September, 1969, on the grounds following that is to say:—

• (a) The said order was made within my jurisdiction.

• (b) There was no error apparent on the face of the said order.

• (c) There was no disregard for the essentials of justice.

• (d) The said charges contained in Harcourt Terrace sheet 212A were properly before the court, the previous similar charges contained in Harcourt Terrace sheet 212 having been withdrawn by the State and any order made thereon having been made inadvertently and at a time when the said charges were not before the District Court for the purpose of adjudication.

4. I make this affidavit from facts within my own knowledge save where otherwise appears."

The prosecutor applied to the High Court for an absolute order of certiorari, notwithstanding the cause shown, and that application came before Henchy J. on the 13th October, 1969. On that date counsel for the Attorney General sought an adjournment to enable the Attorney General to prepare an application for an order of certiorari quashing the order made inadvertently by District Justice John Farrell on the 5th June, 1969. The adjournment was granted by Henchy J. and the Attorney General instituted proceedings entitled The State (Attorney General) v.Farrell (1969. No. 318 SS.).

The resumed hearing of the prosecutor's application and the Attorney General's...