The High Court quashed a warrant that led to Ignatius Forde’s arrest and detention over an unpaid €39,527.32 fine, ruling that a court official had no authority to issue it. The court held that any decision to commit him to prison after default had to be made by a judge following a further hearing.
Forde had pleaded guilty in Carlow Circuit Court to evading excise duty on beer and wine. On 19 March 2013, he was fined €39,527.32, payable within 12 months, with one year’s imprisonment specified in default. The judge had reduced the fine by the maximum 50% allowed. Forde did not appeal, and no part of the fine was paid within the deadline.
In May 2014, Forde appeared before a different Circuit Court judge in an unrelated matter. The Director of Public Prosecutions raised the unpaid fine, but that judge declined to deal with it, saying he had no jurisdiction to interfere with the original sentence. No further application was made to the sentencing judge.
On 8 September 2014, a nominee of the County Registrar issued a warrant directing Forde’s imprisonment unless he paid the fine. The warrant did not identify a statutory power authorising its issue. Forde was arrested on 5 March 2015 and lodged in Midlands Prison. After a Circuit Court judge declined to deal with the matter, Forde challenged the warrant by judicial review. He had been admitted to bail pending that case.
The Director, appearing as notice party, argued that the warrant merely gave effect to the original sentence and that Circuit Court rules allowed a County Registrar’s nominee to authenticate warrants. The High Court held that those rules did not grant officials jurisdiction to issue an imprisonment warrant. It also found that the warrant did not show its legal authority and described the offence as “evasion of excuse duty”.
The court said that, where no statutory process governed enforcement of fines imposed on indictment at the time, the default had to be brought back before the court. The judge would need evidence establishing the default and could consider whether to extend the payment period before deciding whether to issue a committal warrant. The court noted that the Fines (Payment and Recovery) Act 2014 now governed the process, but the provisions were not in force when the warrant was issued.
The High Court concluded that the County Registrar’s nominee had no power to determine default and issue the warrant. It quashed the warrant as having been issued without jurisdiction. The judgment does not overturn Forde’s conviction or original sentence.