The High Court granted two declarations to an Irish-speaking applicant who challenged the availability of Irish-language versions of court rules and a prescribed breath-test form. It did not halt his pending prosecution, and said its judgment did not interfere with the District Court’s work.
The applicant, identified in the judgment as Donnchadh Ó Cuinn, faced a charge alleging that he drove under the influence of alcohol on Main Street, Letterkenny, on 29 March 2014. He said he was not guilty. The judgment describes him as a native Irish speaker and parish priest of An Fál Carrach, County Donegal, who wished to conduct the official proceedings in Irish.
The judgment records that the Evidenzer breath-test form supplied on the day was in English only. The prescribed form appeared in Statutory Instrument 541/2011, which included English and Irish versions, but the Irish version was not available at the time, according to the account before the court. The applicant also complained that District Court rules and related statutory instruments had not been made available in Irish in time.
He sought several declarations and orders, including a bar on further steps in prosecution case 2014/79136. His barrister argued that the English-only form did not meet the prescribed requirements and that the applicant’s ability to prepare and conduct his case in Irish was disadvantaged. The respondents argued that the District Court should decide the criminal case and ensure a fair trial. They said relevant Irish translations were now available and opposed both a prohibition on the prosecution and declaratory relief.
The High Court said the applicant had established his case on requests 1 and 7 in his application: a declaration concerning the duty to provide Irish translations of District Court rules, and a declaration that the statement relied on in the prosecution was not in the prescribed form because it was in English only. The judge granted those two declarations.
As the case proceeded, the applicant no longer pursued the other reliefs. The court said the two declarations did not prevent the prosecution from continuing in Letterkenny District Court, where the case was adjourned until 19 January 2016. The judgment did not determine the applicant’s guilt or innocence, nor did it rule that the prosecution could not rely on the evidence.