The Court of Appeal has ruled that a Scottish allegation of failing to attend a court hearing while on bail corresponds to an offence under section 13 of Ireland’s Criminal Justice Act 1984 when the conduct is transposed to Ireland.
The judgment, delivered by Finlay Geoghegan J. on 24 February 2016, concerned an issue certified by the trial judge under section 16(11) of the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003. The question was whether failing to attend court under conditional release corresponded to an offence in Ireland, including criminal contempt.
The court agreed that the alleged conduct did not correspond to criminal contempt of court. The trial judge had also rejected correspondence with section 13 because the Scottish bail arrangement did not require a monetary recognisance. A recognisance in Ireland was understood to involve a monetary bond or defeasible debt, even if nominal.
However, Finlay Geoghegan J. concluded that the monetary element was not essential to the section 13 offence. The relevant question was whether the person had agreed to a bail condition requiring attendance on a specified date and then failed to attend. For correspondence purposes, the court must consider whether the alleged acts, with their circumstances, would constitute an offence if they occurred in Ireland.
The information from Scottish authorities said the appellant had been charged with assault and theft, appeared before Edinburgh Sheriff Court on 26 April 2013, agreed to bail conditions before a sheriff, and was released on bail. One condition required attendance at appointed times for hearings related to the charges. The alleged failure was to attend a procedural hearing in Edinburgh on 7 January 2014.
The judge acknowledged that the information about the Scottish bail conditions went beyond what would be necessary to prove the Scottish offence. She said the comparison did not turn on matching the ingredients of the two offences. On the conduct described in the warrant and further information, she concluded that it would constitute an offence under section 13 if transposed to Ireland, and that correspondence was established for section 5 of the 2003 Act.
The judgment addresses the certified correspondence question. It does not state in this extract whether surrender was ultimately ordered.