• Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
Reading...
Front

Card Range To Study

through

image

Play button

image

Play button

image

Progress

1/5

Click to flip

Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;

Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;

H to show hint;

A reads text to speech;

5 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back

Relevant Articles

34.1 - Public Administration of Justice


34.3.4 - Courts of Local/Limited Jurisdiction


35.2/35.4 - Judicial Independence/Removal


38.3 - Special Criminal Court

Pre-Trial Publicity

Overlaps with Art 38.1 - Right to Fair Trial


Art 34 - Public Administration of Justice


Re Ansbacher Ltd McCracken J "no hesitation whatever in saying that the right to have justice administered in public far exceeds any right to privacy, confidentiality or a good name"


Re R trial in camera if legislation so provided (s205(7) of the CA 1963). Need legislation and overriding necessity in interest of justice


Irish Press v Ingersoll restated the 2 criteria necessary


Goodman v Hamilton Tribunal of Inquiry does not involve the admin of justice


Roe v BTSD in camera rejected as no legislative provision


The Claimant v St James' same situation as above


Irish Times v Ireland allows for in camera even when no legislative provision


Re Ansbacher held only to apply in criminal cases


Doe v Revenue Comm the Court didn't allow, but did not expressly limit Irish Times to apply purely to criminal matters

Independence & Removal

-Immunity from suit; Desmond v Riordan provided to the protect the public (fear of defamation), however, liable once aware he/she has exceeded jurisdiction.


-Remuneration; O'Byrne v Min for Finance alleged political pressure on judges if they were taxed, cannot be seen as an attack on independence. Reductions such as Pension Levy would be a reduction of pay at source


-Removal; Curtain v Dáil Eireann "stated misbehaviour" over looked as although innocent public perception would render him "incapable" or carrying out functions.

Jurisdiction

McEvitt v Delap


Clune v DPP


Melling v O'Mathghnamhna; Minor offence


-Severity of Penalty Kostan v Ireland penalty of £100,000 is severe Rollinson v Kelly maximum 'likely' sentence


-Moral Quality Melling importation of silk stockings wouldn't be deemed immoral


-Public Opinion in 1937; not crucial

Special Criminal Court

Art 38.3 - ordinary courts inadequate to secure effective administration of justice