X v DPP

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Mr Justice Max Barrett
• Judgment Date: 03 May 2019
• Neutral Citation: [2019] IEHC 291
• Docket Number: 2018 No. 377 JR
• Court: High Court
• Date: 03 May 2019

Between:

X

Applicant

– and –

THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

AND

THE COMMISSIONER OF AN GARDA SÍOCHÁNA

Respondents

[2019] IEHC 291

2018 No. 377 JR

THE HIGH COURT

Order of prohibition – District Court trial – Failure to comply with a notice – Applicant seeking an order of prohibition in respect of a pending District Court trial – Whether the applicant came within any category of persons to whom the Criminal Justice (Forensic Evidence and DNA Database System) Act 2014 applies

Facts: The applicant was charged with failing/refusing without reasonable cause to comply with a notice issued pursuant to s. 31(9) of the Criminal Justice (Forensic Evidence and DNA Database System) Act 2014 requiring him to attend at a Garda station to have a DNA sample taken. He attended the District Court in April 2018 to answer the summons against him. He applied to the High Court seeking an order of prohibition in respect of the pending District Court trial. He contended that he did not come within any category of persons to whom the 2014 Act applies.

Held by the Court that the applicant was entitled to make that contention, but that it ought to be made before the District Court in the first instance.

The Court declined to grant the reliefs sought.

Reliefs refused.

JUDGMENT of Mr Justice Max Barrett delivered on 3rd May, 2019.

1 Mr X has been charged with failing/refusing without reasonable cause to comply with a notice issued pursuant to s.31(9) of the Criminal Justice (Forensic Evidence and DNA Database System) Act 2014 requiring him to attend at a Garda station to have a DNA sample taken. Mr X attended the District Court in April 2018 to answer the summons against him. The District Court is properly seised of the matter and vested with the requisite jurisdiction to deal with Mr X's case ( DPP (McTiernan) v. Bradley [2000] 1 IR 420; DPP (Ivers) v. Murphy [1999] 1 IR 98).

2 In this application Mr X seeks an order of prohibition in respect of the pending District Court trial. He contends that he does not come within the any category of persons to whom the Act of 2014 applies. He is entitled to make that contention; but it ought to be made before the District Court in the first instance. The Supreme Court has repeatedly made clear, e.g., in Byrne v. DPP [2011] 1 IR 346 and Kearns v. DPP [2015] IESC 23, that the constitutional right to a fair trial falls typically to be vindicated via the criminal trial/appeals...