Return to sender...

Cross-border 'loophole' throws hundreds of prosecutions into doubt

A recent High Court ruling has opened a cross-border “loophole” that could see hundreds of motoring prosecutions issued in Cavan and Monaghan thrown into doubt.

More than 100 prosecutions, served by court issued summons to persons living in Northern Ireland, have already been adjourned to a sitting of Cavan District Court later this year, with a further tranche of similar such cases delayed in Monaghan also. The vast majority involve motorists accused of speeding offences.

At the centre is a recent High Court decision in the case of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) versus Evans, which examined whether criminal summonses posted by registered mail to addresses north of the Border were legally valid.

Last month the High Court found that serving summonses outside the State by registered post was unlawful where the proper procedures under the Criminal Justice (Mutual Assistance) Act 2008 had not been followed.

While the High Court ultimately stopped short of ruling that all such prosecutions automatically collapse, it made clear that defective service can, in certain circumstances, undermine proceedings.

The case arose after Mr Evans, whose address was in Crossmaglen, Co Armagh, faced a series of prosecutions before Monaghan District Court, including alleged dangerous driving and public order offences committed in the area of Castleblayney.

When he failed to appear in court, bench warrants were issued for his arrest. He was later detained in Dublin on an unrelated matter and brought before Judge Raymond Finnegan at Monaghan District Court.

Counsel for Mr Evans argued that the original summonses had been unlawfully served and that the court therefore lacked jurisdiction to hear the resulting prosecutions.

In a judgment likely to have nationwide ramifications for cases in Cavan, Monaghan and other Border counties, Mr Justice Barry O’Donnell confirmed that service by registered post outside the jurisdiction was not permitted under District Court rules. However, he also said only “exceptional circumstances” involving serious breaches of constitutional rights or abuses of process would justify halting a prosecution.

A spokesperson for the Department for Justice confirmed that it “notes the High Court judgment in DPP v Evans and is considering its implications".