The High Court refused two applications challenging the legality of the applicants’ detention, holding that a District Court judge was entitled to consult the Houses of the Oireachtas website and take judicial notice of resolutions extending the relevant detention powers.
Mr Justice Hogan delivered the judgment on 3 May 2013, giving reasons for a conclusion reached after a hearing on 30 April. He found both applicants were in lawful custody and refused their applications under Article 40.4.2 of the Constitution.
The cases arose from applications to extend each man’s detention by 24 hours under section 30(4) of the Offences Against the State Act 1939, as amended. That provision allowed a senior Garda officer to seek an extension where there were reasonable grounds to believe it was needed for the proper investigation of an offence. Its continued operation depended on resolutions passed by both Houses of the Oireachtas under section 18 of the Offences Against the State (Amendment) Act 1998.
The applicants argued in the District Court that the Garda applications lacked proof that the resolutions had been passed. In the first case, District Judge Toale consulted the Oireachtas website, found that the resolutions had been passed in June 2012, and issued a warrant extending detention for 24 hours. In the second, a copy of Iris Oifigiúil containing details of the resolutions was tendered, but the judge said he did not require it and issued a similar warrant.
The High Court held that the resolutions were not Acts of the Oireachtas, so the statutory rule requiring courts to take judicial notice of Acts did not apply to them. Nor did the Documentary Evidence Act 1925 provide a formal proof route for these resolutions. Their existence therefore had to be formally proved or judicially noticed.
However, Mr Justice Hogan concluded that material on the Oireachtas website was a public document and constituted prima facie evidence that the resolutions had been passed. After consulting it, the District Court judge was entitled to take judicial notice of that fact without further formal proof. On that basis, the High Court held the detention lawful and refused both applications.