The Court of Appeal has dismissed Gerard Maher’s appeal against his conviction for a drink-driving offence, ruling that the regulations governing breathalyser statements did not require Gardaí to offer him a choice between English and Irish.
The appeal concerned two statements produced after Maher provided breath specimens at Mullingar Garda Station. Both were printed in English. Garda Marius Stones accepted that he had not offered Maher a language choice, and the District Court found that Maher had not been told the apparatus could produce statements in either language.
Maher argued that the statements should not have been admitted as evidence because the 2015 regulations allowed either language and he had not been invited to choose. The District Court rejected his application to dismiss the prosecution, convicted him and imposed a fine and a driving disqualification. On a case stated, the High Court answered both legal questions in favour of the prosecution. Maher then appealed the High Court decision to the Court of Appeal.
Delivering judgment on 17 July 2019, Ms Justice Baker said the regulations assign the Garda member the administrative task of entering the language choice into the apparatus. They do not expressly give the person providing the breath sample a right to choose or require the Garda member to offer one. The court also rejected the argument that such a right could be implied from the statutory scheme or common law. Maher had not argued that his right to conduct business in Irish had been denied.
The court separately considered whether the English statements could be admitted. It noted there was no argument that Maher suffered unfairness, prejudice or detriment from their production in English. Applying the approach set out by the Supreme Court in an earlier case, the court concluded that the absence of any such consequence did not displace the statutory evidential effect of the statements.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. Its ruling addressed the language-choice issue raised in this case; it did not decide a claim based on an asserted constitutional right to conduct business in Irish.