The High Court extended the time for a judicial review brought by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), quashed an order sending Michael Brian McGrady forward for trial on six charges, and directed the District Judge to determine the application to send him forward on the indictable charges.
Mr Justice Murphy gave judgment on 10 August 2005. The DPP had sought to quash the District Judge’s order of 18 September 2003, which included four summary offences alongside two indictable offences. The DPP also sought an order requiring the District Judge to decide whether to send McGrady forward on the indictable charges alone.
The application for judicial review was made on 27 July 2004. The DPP said its solicitor’s office received the papers on 23 March 2004, mistakenly understood that the return for trial had occurred in January 2004, and overlooked the matter amid pressure of work. The notice party opposed an extension, arguing the delay was inadequately explained and could prejudice a fair trial. The court found the explanation justifiable and held that the notice party had not shown prejudice sufficient to prevent an extension.
The court noted that the case had been removed from the Circuit Court list on 14 January 2004 after a jurisdictional objection. It found that the Circuit Court had not been misled about the return-for-trial date and that removing the case from the list exposed McGrady to no risk of injustice and involved no want of fair procedure.
The judge held that section 6 of the Criminal Justice Act 1951 did not permit an accused person to be sent forward for trial on summary charges. The court therefore granted certiorari quashing the 18 September 2003 order. It also granted mandamus in relation to the remaining indictable charges. The judgment does not state that the court determined the criminal charges themselves.