The High Court dismissed an Article 40 application by C.I., finding he was in lawful custody after his arrest and charge in August 2020. Mr Justice Richard Humphreys said Gardaí could comply with a District Court judge’s request to bring the already detained man to a family law hearing, and that the overall delay in bringing him before a criminal court was not unlawful in the circumstances.
C.I. was arrested at Dún Laoghaire Garda Station at 10.55am on 25 August 2020 under section 10(2) of the Criminal Justice Act 1984, which allows re-arrest for charging. He was charged at 11.47am with three offences under theft and fraud, non-fatal offences against the person and criminal damage legislation. The judge accepted Garda evidence that the arrest was for charging and that the time taken for custody procedures and preparing charge sheets was not unlawful delay.
While C.I. was in custody, a District Court judge asked that he be brought to Dolphin House so a barring order application could be finalised. Gardaí brought him there before taking him to the criminal court. A two-year barring order was made. The High Court held that bringing him to that hearing did not make his detention unlawful: the dominant purpose of detention remained bringing him before a criminal court, and compliance with the judicial request was permissible.
Gardaí then took C.I. to the Criminal Courts of Justice. At screening, he reported a cough and other symptoms while awaiting a COVID test. A prison service nurse refused him access to the custody area without a doctor’s letter. After a doctor examined him at the station and supplied a letter saying he displayed no symptoms, it was too late to return to that evening’s court sitting. The judge accepted evidence that C.I. later said he had been “only messing” about having coronavirus because he thought he would get out. He concluded that delay after the screening was C.I.’s responsibility.
The court considered the relevant period to be from the 11.47am charge until the 4.40pm screening. It found that period did not breach the requirement to bring him before a court “as soon as practicable”. The judge dismissed the application on 26 August 2020, indicated C.I. could be brought to the District Court on the criminal matter, and adjourned costs generally with liberty to apply.
The judgment records allegations that the offences arose from an incident involving C.I.’s 90-year-old father; those allegations remained to be proved to the criminal standard. A barring order had previously been made on matters proved to the civil standard. The applicant’s name was redacted because the related domestic violence proceedings were heard otherwise than in public.