Judgment: 2024-06-17 · Court archive

Hogan J would allow McAreavey appeal over telephone metadata

In a separate Supreme Court judgment, Gerard Hogan J said he would allow the appeal on the metadata ground and agreed with Collins J on the construction of a criminal law provision.

The Supreme Court · [2024] IESC 23

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • GARY MCAREAVEY (Appellant)
  • Gerard Hogan (Judge)
What

In a separate Supreme Court judgment, Gerard Hogan J said he would allow the appeal on the metadata ground and agreed with Collins J on the construction of a criminal law provision.

Where

No place detail is included in this summary.

When

Judgment:

Other dates in the report
  • 22 October 2020; 5 January 2021; 28 July 2022

    The judgment describes an appeal arising from a Special Criminal Court ruling on 22 October 2020 admitting key telephone metadata evidence connected with McAreavey. The Special Criminal Court convicted him on 5 January 2021, and the Court of Appeal affirmed that conviction on 28 July 2022.

Why

Read the report below for the decision and any reasons given.

Gerard Hogan J said he would allow Gary McAreavey’s appeal on a ground concerning telephone metadata accessed by gardaí, while agreeing with Collins J on the interpretation of a criminal law provision.

In a judgment delivered on 17 June 2024, Hogan J identified two issues: whether access to the telephone metadata breached Article 8 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms, and the proper construction of section 7(2) of the Criminal Law Act 1997.

On the metadata issue, Hogan J said he adhered to the views in his judgment in The People (DPP) v Smyth [2024] IESC 22. He said he would allow the appeal on that ground. On the interpretation of section 7(2), he said he fully agreed with Collins J’s judgment and proposed order.

The judgment describes an appeal arising from a Special Criminal Court ruling on 22 October 2020 admitting key telephone metadata evidence connected with McAreavey. The Special Criminal Court convicted him on 5 January 2021, and the Court of Appeal affirmed that conviction on 28 July 2022.

This is Hogan J’s judgment. The source does not state the Supreme Court’s final order in the appeal; it refers to Collins J’s judgment and proposed order on the section 7(2) issue. It therefore does not establish the overall disposition from this judgment alone.

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