The People (Director of Public Prosecutions) v J.C.
| Jurisdiction | Ireland |
| Judge | Mr. Justice John Murray,Mr. Justice Hardiman,O'Donnell J.,Mr. Justice William M. McKechnie,Mr. Justice Clarke,Mr. Justice John MacMenamin |
| Judgment Date | 15 April 2015 |
| Neutral Citation | [2015] IESC 31 |
| Court | Supreme Court |
| Docket Number | 398/2012,[S.C. No. 398 of 2012] |
| Date | 15 April 2015 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Start Your 7-day Trial
110 cases
-
Director of Public Prosecutions v Kelly & McGrath
... [2011] 1 I.R. 346; People (DPP) v. Doyle [2018] 1 I.R.1; People (DPP) v. Gilligan [2006] 1 I.R. 107 and People (DPP) v. J.C. [2017] 1 I.R. 417. 120 . The trial court ruled on the admissibility issue on day 30 in a lengthy ruling running to thirteen pages of transcript in which it sought......
-
DPP v Roche, Roche, & Freeman
...samples were illegally retained and no explanation as to why this was so was put forward. The appellant relies on The People (DPP) v. JC [2015] IESC 31 where Clarke J. (as he then was) stated: - “… there is also an obligation on the courts to uphold the law and to discourage illegality. It ......
-
Criminal Assets Bureau v Murphy
...and conscious breach of constitutional rights (in the sense clarified by the Court in Director of Public Prosecutions v J.C. (No. 1) [2017] IR 417). O'Malley J held that where the issue concerns evidence in the true sense, the J.C. test (including that part of the test concerned with eviden......
-
DPP v O'Connor
...not seem to have had admissible evidence to offer in any event. 12 We are also of the view that the appellant's reliance on DPP v. JC [2017] 1 IR 417 is misplaced insofar as it requires an assessment of the conduct of senior officials. Such an assessment can only be embarked upon where the ......
Get Started for Free
2 firm's commentaries
-
Landmark Supreme Court Judgment On Evidence
...Supreme Court delivered a landmark judgment in the case of DPP v JC [2015] IESC 31 where it articulated a new exclusionary rule concerning unconstitutionally obtained evidence. Prior to this decision, the old long-standing exclusionary rule from the case of DPP v Kenny [1990] 2 1R 110 provi......
-
Divergence On The Proximity Test For "Nervous Shock"' Will It Last?
...ER 77. 12. Séamus Henchy, Precedent in the Irish Supreme Court, Modern Law Review, Volume 25 Issue 5, September 1962. 13. ibid 15. 14. [2015] IESC 31. 15. [1990] 2 IR 16. ibid para. 98. The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advi......
12 books & journal articles
-
Towards A Presumption Of Victimhood: Possibilities For Re-Balancing The Criminal Process
...ibid [8.2]. 29 KD v DPP [2016] IEHC 21, Humphreys J. 30 The State (Walsh) v Cash [2005] 1 ILRM 443, Charleton J and see DPP v JC (No 1) [2015] IESC 31, where the theme of community rights runs through the majority judgments revising the rule of exclusion on a mere mistake is overturned. The......
-
Irish Criminal Trials and European Legal Culture: A Backdrop to Brexit
...[2018] IEHC 685 (O’Connor J).29. Dwyer v Garda Commissioner [2019] IESCDET 108.30. Dwyer v Garda Commissioner [2020] IESC 4.31. DPP v JC [2015] IESC 31; [2017] 1 IR 417. See YM Daly, ‘Overruling the Protectionist Exclusionary Rule: DPP v JC’ 19(4) E&P 270; C Leon and T Ward, ‘The Irish Excl......
-
If 'Mum' is the Word, is it the Law? Irish Privacy Law: A Comparative Perspective
...36, 71. 12 [2010] IEHC 221; See also the South African position in Bernstein v Bester [1996] ZACC 2. 13 Kennedy (n 10) 593. 14 JC v DPP [2015] IESC 31 . 15 Kennedy (n 10) 595. 16 Hanahoe v Hussey [1998] 3 IR 69, 96. 2017] Irish Privacy Law: A Comparative Perspective 67 privacy as a general ......
-
Overruling the protectionist exclusionary rule
...An individual police officer is known either as a member of the Garda Sı´ocha´na, or as a ‘garda’, with theplural being ‘gardaı´’.7. [2015] IESC 31.8. Ibid. per Hardiman J at [134].9. The decision on the facts in O’Brien, as noted in the text below, was that the impugned evidence had been o......
Get Started for Free