The State (Duggan) v Tapley
Jurisdiction | Ireland |
Judgment Date | 12 December 1952 |
Date | 12 December 1952 |
Docket Number | Case No. 109 |
Court | Supreme Court |
Arrest - Irish citizen residing and domiciled in Ireland - Charge of offence in London contrary to the Larceny Act, 1916, s. 32 - English warrant endorsed for execution in Ireland by Deputy Commissioner of the Garda Siochana - Arrest of citizen under warrant - Validity of endorsement of warrant -Extradition - Whether Petty Sessions (Ireland) Act, 1851, s. 29, ceased to be operative in Ireland by virtue of the coming into operation of the Constitution - Petty Sessions (Ireland) Act, 1851 (14 15 Vict., c. 93), s. 29 - Constitution of Ireland, Articles 1, 5, 6, 9, 29, 40, 50 - Petty Sessions (Ireland) Act, 1851, Adaptation Order, 1938 (Stat. R. O., 1938, No. 300).
-
Sect. 29 of the Petty Sessions (Ireland) Act, 1851, as adapted by the Petty Sessions (Ireland) Act, 1851, Adaptation Order, 1938, provides inter alia that whenever any person against whom any warrant shall be issued by any Justice in England for any crime or offence, shall reside or be in Ireland, it shall be lawful for the Commissioner or a Deputy Commissioner of the Garda Siochana or for any Justice (in Ireland] to endorse the warrant authorising its execution within his jurisdiction. On the 28th October, 1950, the prosecutor was taken into custody by a member of the Garda Siochana on a warrant issued by a magistrate of the London Metropolitan Police Courts and duly endorsed for execution in Ireland by a Deputy Commissioner of the Garda Siochana. The prosecutor was brought to, and detained in, the Bridewell, in Dublin, for the purpose of being handed over to the British police...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
McKee v Culligan
...40.3 CONSTITUTION ART 15.5 MCGLINCHEY V WREN 1982 IR 154 EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON THE SUPPRESSION OF TERRORISM 1977 DUGGAN, STATE V TAPLEY 1952 IR 62 SHANNON V FANNING 1984 IR 569 FINUCANE V MCMAHON 1990 IR 165 & 200 1990 ILRM 505 QUINN V WREN 1985 IR 322 EXTRADITION (EUROPEAN CONVENTION ......
-
McKee v Culligan
...development of international law and the section did not infringe Article 29, s. 3 of the Constitution. The State (Duggan) v. TapleyIR [1952] I.R. 62 applied. 4. That even assuming the offences were political offences prior to the coming in to force of the Act of 1987, the process of seekin......
-
Melling v O Mathghamhna
...[1946] 1 K. B. 176. (6) [1945] I. R. 183. (7) 94 I. L. T. R. 161. (8) [1941] A. C. 378. (9) [1928] I. R. 308. (10) [1959] I. R. 1. (11) [1952] I. R. 62. (1) [1945] I. R. 183. (1) [1945] I. R. 183. (2) [1930] I. R. 163. (3) [1946] K. B. 176. (1) [1945] I. R. 183. (2) 94 I. L. T. R. 161. (1) ......
-
State (Whelan) v Governor of Mountjoy Prison
...or complaint could only be taken or made between the States or governments involved. 7I was referred to the following cases:- 8Tapley (1952) I.R. 62; Lawless (1960) I.R.; O'Brien (1965) I.R.; Sumers Jennings (1966) I.R. 183; Holmes (1967) I.R. 210; Furlong (1971) I.R. 132; Byrne (1972) I.R.......
-
Some reflections on the law of contempt
...one considers the type of casual comments that are made by disappointed and disgruntled litigants and their lawyers, it is hard to see 61[1952] I.R. 62. 62[1981] I.R. 2002] Reflections on Contempt 110 what line of principle was crossed. In this case, I suspect the court was more exercised b......