Judgment: 2015-03-10 · Court archive

Court of Appeal invalidates drug-control power in Misuse of Drugs Act

The court allowed Stanislav Bederev’s constitutional appeal, ruling that the Government’s broad power to add controlled drugs lacked sufficient statutory guidance. It also held the 2011 order invalid.

The Court of Appeal · [2015] IECA 38

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Stanislav Bederev (Plaintiff)
  • Gerard Hogan (Judge)
  • Finlay Geoghegan
  • Peart
What

The court allowed Stanislav Bederev’s constitutional appeal, ruling that the Government’s broad power to add controlled drugs lacked sufficient statutory guidance. It also held the 2011 order invalid.

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Blanchardstown
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The Court of Appeal allowed Stanislav Bederev’s appeal and declared section 2(2) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1977 invalid as repugnant to Article 15.2.1 of the Constitution. It also held that the 2011 order declaring methylethcathinone a controlled drug was invalid.

The Court of Appeal allowed Stanislav Bederev’s appeal and declared section 2(2) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1977 invalid as repugnant to Article 15.2.1 of the Constitution. It also held that the 2011 order declaring methylethcathinone a controlled drug was invalid.

The judgment, delivered by Mr Justice Gerard Hogan on 10 March 2015, followed a High Court decision that had refused to make the declaration. Justices Finlay Geoghegan and Peart agreed with Hogan J.

Bederev had been charged at Blanchardstown District Court in April 2012 with offences concerning possession and possession with intent to sell controlled drugs. The charges were amended so that they concerned methylethcathinone, which the Government had classified as a controlled drug under the 2011 order. The District Court proceedings were adjourned pending the appeal.

The appeal concerned whether section 2(2), which allowed the Government by order to declare substances controlled drugs, unlawfully transferred legislative power from the Oireachtas. The Court of Appeal concluded that the Act did not set out sufficient principles and policies to guide the Government’s choices. The long title referred to preventing misuse of dangerous or harmful drugs, but the court found those broad terms did not adequately limit which substances could be controlled.

The court rejected the argument that the power was sufficiently constrained by the schedule of drugs already listed in the Act or by international conventions mentioned in the legislation. It also held that the ability of either House of the Oireachtas to annul an order did not cure the constitutional defect.

The ruling addressed the validity of the statutory power and the 2011 order. The judgment does not state the outcome of Bederev’s District Court charges; those proceedings had been adjourned pending the appeal.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review