Delay in prosecution - Child Defendant - DPP v Furlong [2021] IEHC 326

The assault offences took place when the defendant had just turned 17 - having made admissions, the delay in prosecution caused significant prejudice to the defendant. In restraining the prosecution, Barr J in the High Court stated:

88. In conclusion, the court is satisfied that there has been culpable prosecutorial delay in this case and that as a result thereof, the applicant has suffered a significant prejudice in the loss of the opportunity to have a District Court Judge decide whether in his discretion he will deal with the matter pursuant to s.75 of the 2001 Act. In addition, irrespective of what jurisdiction the prosecution may have proceeded in, he has lost the statutory right to anonymity due to the fact that his trial will proceed when he is an adult. For the reasons set out above the court is satisfied that these are significant prejudices suffered by the applicant. In carrying out the balancing exercise that is required of the court, the court is satisfied that the prejudice to the applicant by the loss of these significant statutory provisions, outweighs the public interest in the prosecution of these offences, notwithstanding that they are serious in nature.

89. In light of its conclusions herein, the court proposes to make an order in the terms of para. 1 of the ex parte docket herein, granting an injunction by way of judicial review restraining the continued prosecution of the applicant by the respondent on two charges of assault causing harm contrary to s.3 of the Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act, 1997 in respect of the offences alleged to have been committed by the applicant on 22nd May, 2017.

Furlong v DPP 2021 IEHC 326.pdf

Download PDF • 201KB