The Court of Appeal has dismissed Michael O’Brien’s appeal in a dispute over the consequences of an earlier ruling that quashed a 40-year driving disqualification imposed after a road traffic conviction.
The appeal concerned a High Court decision delivered on 21 March 2017. O’Brien had sought judicial review of a Naas District Court order, arguing that the conviction could not stand without a consequential disqualification order required by statute. The High Court refused relief, finding that the issue had already been decided in the earlier proceedings.
O’Brien had pleaded guilty to driving while disqualified and driving without insurance. The District Court imposed four months’ imprisonment and a 40-year disqualification for driving while disqualified. It took the insurance offence into consideration without imposing a separate penalty. The judgment records that O’Brien had 14 previous road traffic convictions, including two for driving while disqualified and five for driving without insurance.
In earlier judicial review proceedings, the Court of Appeal quashed the 40-year disqualification, describing it as outside the range of what could be considered reasonable. It left the conviction intact and said the disqualification was severable from the sentence. It also said a judge could consider the disqualification afresh if O’Brien appealed his prison sentence.
In the present appeal, O’Brien argued that the remaining District Court order was invalid because it contained no consequential disqualification for the insurance offence. He also argued that the order deprived him of an appeal on disqualification. His counsel maintained that the challenge relied on, rather than attacked, the earlier Court of Appeal ruling.
The court rejected that characterisation. It said the relief sought would in substance challenge the earlier ruling, which had granted the relief O’Brien had requested by removing the 40-year disqualification. If the consequences of that order created a difficulty, the court said, the issue should have been brought back to the Court of Appeal that made it at the earliest opportunity.
The judgment acknowledged that the circumstances were unusual, but held there was no basis for intervention. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. It did not reinstate the 40-year disqualification or decide what disqualification, if any, should otherwise apply.