Judgment: 2025-04-11 · Court archive

High Court prohibits Kildare money laundering prosecution over delay while accused was a minor

High Court · [2025] IEHC 279

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • F (Applicant)
What

High Court prohibits Kildare money laundering prosecution over delay while accused was a minor

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Kildare Circuit Criminal Court
  • High Court
When

Judgment:

Other dates in the report
  • 6 June 2019

    The applicant, identified only as F, was 16 years and two months old when the alleged offence occurred on 6 June 2019. He was accused of attempted money laundering under the Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Act 2010.

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The High Court has prohibited an attempted money laundering prosecution pending before Kildare Circuit Criminal Court after finding that Garda delays while the accused was a minor caused him significant and irreversible prejudice.

The High Court has prohibited an attempted money laundering prosecution pending before Kildare Circuit Criminal Court after finding that Garda delays while the accused was a minor caused him significant and irreversible prejudice.

The applicant, identified only as F, was 16 years and two months old when the alleged offence occurred on 6 June 2019. He was accused of attempted money laundering under the Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Act 2010.

A complaint was made the following day. The investigation was referred to a Garda in October 2019. Search warrants were obtained in January 2020 and electronic devices were seized. Those devices were sent for forensic examination in May 2020.

F turned 18 in April 2021. He was not arrested until April 2022, shortly after his 19th birthday. By then, the analysis of the devices had still not been completed. The investigation ultimately proceeded without it.

Ms Justice Marguerite Bolger held that the State owed F a special duty to progress the investigation quickly because he was a child. She found unexplained delays at several stages and said the Garda Cyber Crime Bureau’s prioritisation system had not adequately taken account of his age or proximity to adulthood.

The legal consequence was significant. Had F been tried while still a child, he would have benefited from protections under the Children Act 2001, including anonymity and restrictions on reporting his identity.

The judge considered the loss of anonymity the most serious prejudice. A public Circuit Court prosecution for money laundering could create online reporting and commentary capable of following F throughout his working life, particularly where the charge could affect perceptions of his honesty in financial matters.

The court also considered the alleged offence to rank relatively low in gravity. No money was deposited into F’s account and it was not alleged that his account had actually been used to launder criminal proceeds.

The prejudice caused by the delay therefore outweighed the public interest in prosecution. An order prohibiting the criminal proceedings was granted.

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