Courts / Ireland / Report

Judge right to exclude non-examining doctor's evidence, Supreme Court finds

Summary

In a 2016 bar‑stool assault case, the Supreme Court upheld a Circuit Court judge's decision to exclude a doctor's certificate as evidence because the doctor had not personally examined the victim. The accused, charged with assault causing harm and assault causing serious harm, was found guilty of the lesser offence and received a suspended jail sentence, while the serious‑harm charge was acquitted. The DPP had sought admission of the certificate under Section 25 of the 1997 Non‑Fatal Offences Act, which requires a certificate signed by a practitioner who examined the injured person. The defence argued the certificate was based on clinical notes from another practitioner. The Supreme Court ruled that the certificate could not be admitted as the practitioner could not certify facts from another's examination, and noted the section's ambiguity and narrow scope. The Court of Appeal had previously ruled the exclusion was incorrect, but the Supreme Court reversed that decision.

Who, what, where, when and why

What: Report matter: Judge right to exclude non-examining doctor's evidence, Supreme Court finds. Charges or matters: and has come before the Circuit Criminal Court on two offences: one count of assault causing harm and one count of assault causing serious harm. Procedural stage: appeal. Findings: Acquitted

When:

• 2021-11-03 Publication

Why: Photo: Collins) In a case which has implications for many criminal trials, the Supreme Court has upheld a judge's decision to exclude a certificate from a doctor as evidence in a bar stool assault case because the doctor had not personally examined the alleged victim. CNI source report

Case subjects

Places mentioned

Topics

Stage Appeal Violent Crime

Read the original CNI report