The High Court has refused Stephen Brady leave to bring judicial review proceedings challenging his conviction for possessing an unregistered vehicle liable for vehicle registration tax.
In a judgment delivered on 28 September 2018, Ms Justice Tara Burns dismissed the application. She found that Brady had not shown an arguable case for an order quashing the conviction and refused leave for the reliefs he sought. The ruling concerned permission to bring judicial review proceedings; it did not set aside or rehear the conviction.
Brady was convicted in Monaghan Circuit Court on 29 November 2016 after appealing a District Court conviction from 14 October 2013. The offence related to his possession on 25 November 2011 of a vehicle registered in Northern Ireland. He accepted that the elements of the offence were established under domestic law.
His judicial review application argued that the relevant Finance Act provisions were incompatible with European Union law, relying on the Court of Justice of the European Union’s 2012 van Putten decision. He said the Circuit Court judge had failed to consider that defence and should have stated a case to the Court of Appeal.
The High Court reviewed the transcript of the Circuit Court hearing and rejected that account. It found the judge had considered van Putten and decided it did not apply because the evidence showed the vehicle had been driven in the State before the occasion underlying the charge. The judge also refused to state a case, and the High Court held both decisions were within her jurisdiction.
The evidence before the Circuit Court was that Brady had been stopped in the vehicle in February 2011, when it was seized and later returned after a penalty was paid and a declaration signed. Customs officials also saw him driving it in July, August and September. The Revenue Commissioners allowed a 30-day period to register a vehicle registered elsewhere. The Circuit Court convicted Brady and reduced the sentence to a €3,500 fine.
Justice Burns said the wife’s place of residence was disputed but was not significant to the judicial review: the vehicle’s Northern Ireland registration was uncontroverted. She added that, in any event, the Circuit Court judge was correct to distinguish van Putten on the evidence of repeated use. The High Court said the other requested reliefs therefore did not arise.