The Supreme Court has quashed a Garda Síochána Complaints Board decision after finding that a complaint against seven Garda members was received 49 minutes after the statutory deadline expired.
The complaint concerned alleged conduct on 5 March 2004 involving Timothy Walsh, Conlaith Mulhall, Mary Gilmartin, Seamus Fitzgerald, Patrick Joseph Black, Brian O’Neill and Edward Monaghan.
Dr David Cloran telephoned the chief executive of the Complaints Board on 3 September 2004. That telephone call could not itself constitute a valid complaint because the legislation excluded an oral communication transmitted electronically.
At the chief executive’s suggestion, Cloran sent a letter by fax. It arrived at the Board at 00:49:20 on 5 September 2004.
The central issue was how the six-month deadline in the Garda Síochána (Complaints) Act 1986 had to be calculated. Under the Interpretation Act 1937, the date of the event complained of was included when calculating the period. That meant 5 March counted as the first day and the six months expired at midnight on 4 September.
Mr Justice Fennelly said it was agreed that, viewed under the primary time-limit provision alone, the complaint was late. The Board argued that another section of the Act, dealing with admissibility, produced a different result because it referred to conduct occurring within six months “before” the date the complaint was made.
The Supreme Court rejected that interpretation. Fennelly J held that the two provisions had to operate consistently and that the statutory interpretation rule applied from either end of the calculation.
As a result, the fax received shortly after midnight was outside the permitted period. The court allowed the appeals, set aside the High Court order and substituted orders quashing the Complaints Board’s decision in each case.