The High Court has refused a judicial review challenge by Liam O'Driscoll and Brendan O'Driscoll to their return for trial on fishing-related charges. The court rejected their argument that the offences were legally invalid and said a separate dispute about where the alleged offences occurred should be resolved at trial.
The applicants, described in the judgment as the masters and owners of the Irish-registered fishing vessel Carmona, were charged in November 2008 and returned for trial in March 2009. The charges concern alleged failures on multiple dates in 2003 and 2004 to complete the vessel’s fishing logbook correctly and to make correct landing declarations. The alleged offences arise under fisheries legislation and regulations implementing European Community rules.
The applicants sought judicial review in 2009, initially on three grounds. At the hearing, they relied on two: that section 224B of the Fisheries (Consolidation) Act 1959 created offences that were void, and that the alleged offences were not committed within the State’s exclusive fishery limits.
On the first ground, Mr Justice Hedigan said the issue had already been addressed by the High Court in Michael Faherty v Attorney General. In that decision, the court held that the Oireachtas created the offence and that regulations set out its subject matter or details. The applicants gave no reason for the court to depart from that decision, and this ground was rejected.
The court did not decide whether the alleged fishing offences occurred within the State’s exclusive fishery limits. Justice Hedigan treated that as an evidential issue for the criminal trial, where the evidence could be fully presented and questioned. He said the trial court was best placed to rule on the issue and its effect on the case.
The High Court refused the relief sought. The judgment did not determine the applicants’ guilt or the outcome of the criminal proceedings.