Judgment: 2020-02-06 · Court archive

High Court says gardaí had no common-law power to enter Tralee apartment to make arrest

Answering a District Court case stated, the High Court held the entry was not authorised by common law and the defendant had no case to answer on the obstruction charge. The ruling concerned that charge; it did not decide the separate assault complaint.

High Court · [2020] IEHC 110

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Garda John Coffey
What

Answering a District Court case stated, the High Court held the entry was not authorised by common law and the defendant had no case to answer on the obstruction charge. The ruling concerned that charge; it did not decide the separate assault complaint.

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Tralee
  • The defendant’s apartment
When

Judgment:

Other dates in the report
  • 26 May 2017

    The case arose from events on 26 May 2017, when gardaí were called to a disturbance at the defendant’s apartment. They found a broken living-room window and a block of knives outside. Garda John Coffey told the District Court that the defendant appeared agitated and that items were scattered around the apartment. Coffey said the defendant spat in his face at the doorway.

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The case arose from events on 26 May 2017, when gardaí were called to a disturbance at the defendant’s apartment. They found a broken living-room window and a block of knives outside. Garda John Coffey told the District Court that the defendant appeared agitated and that items were scattered around the apartment. Coffey said the defendant spat in his face at the doorway.

The High Court has ruled that gardaí had no common-law power to enter a man’s home in Tralee to arrest him for breach of the peace, and that he had no case to answer on a charge of obstructing them. The court answered questions put by a District Court judge in a case stated; it did not determine the separate assault complaint.

The case arose from events on 26 May 2017, when gardaí were called to a disturbance at the defendant’s apartment. They found a broken living-room window and a block of knives outside. Garda John Coffey told the District Court that the defendant appeared agitated and that items were scattered around the apartment. Coffey said the defendant spat in his face at the doorway.

Coffey said he and three colleagues then entered the apartment to arrest the defendant for breach of the peace. He said they saw a knife on the kitchen floor and that the defendant violently resisted their efforts to arrest him. The arrest took place in the kitchen.

The defendant faced two complaints: resisting or obstructing a peace officer, and simple assault. At the close of the prosecution case, his solicitor argued there was no case to answer on either charge. On the obstruction charge, he submitted that the entry and arrest in the home were unlawful and breached the constitutional protection of the dwelling. The District Court rejected that argument, convicted the defendant on the obstruction charge and stated questions for the High Court. The defendant appealed that conviction by way of case stated.

The High Court considered the protection of the dwelling under Article 40.5 of the Constitution and the statutory power in section 6(2) of the Criminal Law Act 1997 to enter a dwelling in specified circumstances to arrest someone for an arrestable offence. The judgment said section 6 was not relied on in this prosecution and could not be used retrospectively to justify the entry. The court also said that, except where life is in imminent danger, restrictions on the constitutional protection are those provided by statute.

Mr Justice Meenan answered “no” to both questions. He held that the gardaí had no common-law power to enter the defendant’s dwelling to make the breach-of-the-peace arrest and that the District Court judge was wrong to find that the defendant had a case to answer on the obstruction charge. The judgment does not record a decision on the assault complaint.

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