The People (Director of Public Prosecutions) v J.C.

JurisdictionIreland
JudgeMr. Justice John Murray,Mr. Justice Hardiman,O'Donnell J.,Mr. Justice William M. McKechnie,Mr. Justice Clarke,Mr. Justice John MacMenamin
Judgment Date15 April 2015
Neutral Citation[2015] IESC 31
CourtSupreme Court
Docket Number398/2012,[S.C. No. 398 of 2012]
Date15 April 2015
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex
110 cases
  • Director of Public Prosecutions v Kelly & McGrath
    • Ireland
    • Court of Appeal (Ireland)
    • 31 Marzo 2022
    ... [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
    • Ireland
    • Court of Appeal (Ireland)
    • 19 Diciembre 2019
    ...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
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 27 Febrero 2018
    ...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
    • Ireland
    • Court of Appeal (Ireland)
    • 28 Enero 2020
    ...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
    • Ireland
    • Mondaq Ireland
    • 11 Septiembre 2015
    ...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?
    • Ireland
    • Mondaq Ireland
    • 25 Enero 2023
    ...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
    • Ireland
    • Irish Judicial Studies Journal No. 2-21, July 2021
    • 1 Julio 2021
    ...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
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage Journal of Criminal Law, The No. 85-2, April 2021
    • 1 Abril 2021
    ...[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
    • Ireland
    • Trinity College Law Review No. XX-2017, January 2017
    • 1 Enero 2017
    ...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
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage International Journal of Evidence & Proof, The No. 19-4, October 2015
    • 1 Octubre 2015
    ...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

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT